On Nov. 20, Law360 published an article by Gordon & Rees partner James G. Scadden and associate Samuel D. Jubelirer of San Francisco. In the article, titled “A Surprising Quirk of Dietary Supplement Regulation,” the authors discussed the lack of U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulation of nutritional supplements and what lawyers need to know when defending manufacturers and distributors in litigation that involves allegedly contaminated supplements.
“The relative lack of regulation of nutritional supplements by the FDA may impact the nature and amount of evidence that will be available in your case. . . . FDA does not set general limits on the presence of certain contaminants in foods or supplements, so there are no specific standards for a manufacturer to measure against in determining if their supplement is safe. But there are other sources of nonregulatory guidance that one might use as evidence of negligence or strict liability in a contaminated supplement case,” Scadden and Jubelirer wrote.
Scadden focuses his practice on defending personal injury suits involving asbestos, benzene, and dietary supplements as well as Proposition 65 compliance cases and other toxic exposure suits. He represents clients in all stages of litigation throughout California. Scadden is rated AV® Preeminent™ by Martindale-Hubbell and has been recognized by Super Lawyers in the fields of Personal Injury Defense: General, Real Estate, and Environmental.
Jubelirer defends clients in a variety of industries, including equipment, food and beverage manufacturers and retailers, against asbestos and other toxic exposure personal injury and wrongful death claims.
Click here to read the article on Law360 or here to read it on the Gordon & Rees website.