Wines Don’t Need Arsenic Warning, Calif. Appeals Court Says

    Bob Morgenstern and Ninos Saroukhanioff, as part of a defense collective, successfully represented Mason Cellars, one of many vintners, who were sued as part of a class action arguing wines that contain allegedly unsafe levels of arsenic should include an arsenic warning, saying the products' alcoholic beverage warning sufficiently notifies customers about potential risks.

    The case was dismissed by the trial court on demurrer.  A panel of  California Second Appellate District judges ruled, in a published opinion, that the lack of a separate arsenic warning on wines does not violate California's Proposition 65 labeling law, because the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment requires companies to disclose just one chemical for each health risk affirming the ruling of the lower court dismissing the class action in its entirety.