Law Center Search Results

The NAM filed an amicus brief urging the California Superior Court to hold that federal preemption prohibited a district attorney’s action under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL). The district attorney sought civil penalties, in addition to those already imposed by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health, against a manufacturer under the state’s unfair competition law and fair advertising law. This litigation is concerning to manufacturers that are already subjected to federal workplace safety regulations, which impose uniform, deliberate and predictable health and safety requirements, because they would be subjected to duplicative and counterproductive regulation. The NAM’s brief argued that 1) the lawsuit is preempted by federal law, which determines the regulations and enforcement methods for workplace safety standards in California; 2) the UCL is inconsistent with California’s approved penalty structure for workplace safety violations; and 3) the court should require pre-approval under the state plan of unfair competition claims for workplace safety violations. Unfortunately, the California Supreme Court held that the UCL was not preempted by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act.