Complain about a product or service

CA Restaurants Will Issue Fish Warnings

February 9, 2005
California restaurants will soon be warning diners about the dangers of mercury in fish.

Mercury in Fish • High Mercury Levels Found In Sushi • Maternal Seafood Consumption Benefits Children's Development • Study: Benefits of Fish Outweigh the Risks • Tests Find Higher Mercury Content In Imported Tuna • Americans Confused about Mercury in Seafood, Survey Finds • Whole Foods Agrees to Post FDA's Mercury Warning • Americans Confused about Health Effects of Eating Fish • Mercury Levels Rising In Sport Fish • FDA Finds High Mercury Levels in Some Canned Light Tuna • Study: Moderate Fish Consumption Poses Mercury Risks • CSPI: Government Should Warn About Mercury in Fish • Whole Foods Pressed To Add Mercury Warnings • Warnings about Mercury in Fish May Do More Harm Than Good • Despite Contaminants, Fish Healthy for Most Men • Fish is Brain Food • FDA Urged to Crack Down on Tuna Mercury Levels • CA Restaurants Will Issue Fish Warnings • California Sues Tuna Canneries

San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer approved a settlement of an environmental lawsuit against major restaurant chains under which hundreds of restaurants statewide will be required to post the warnings.

"We're not trying to discourage people from eating fish, which is an important source of protein and an important part of a balanced, healthy diet," said Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who sued the restaurants.

"People have a right to know when they are being exposed to substances that can cause cancer, birth defects or reproductive harm, and businesses have a legal duty to provide that notice. This settlement achieves these significant public health objectives."

The settlement also requires the restaurants to pay $132,287 in civil penalties and another $132,287 to fund programs to educate consumers about mercury in fish, and to help finance the effort to monitor the defendants' compliance with the settlement.

Lockyer filed the lawsuit in April 2003, alleging the restaurants violated Proposition 65 by failing to post "clear and reasonable" consumer warnings about exposure to mercury in shark, swordfish and tuna. Proposition 65 requires such warnings when consumers are exposed to substances known by the state to cause cancer or reproductive harm. Mercury and its various compounds are listed by the state as such substances.

All but two of the restaurants will be required to post a detailed warning about mercury in fish that includes a notice that pregnant women and young children should not eat shark, swordfish, mackerel and tilefish. The same warning also advises pregnant women and small children to limit their consumption of tuna.

The other two restaurant chains – Morton's Restaurant Group and a corporation that includes Bennigan's – will have to post a generic warning that advises patrons known carcinogens or reproductive toxins may be present in food or beverages sold in the restaurant.

The warnings must be posted near the front door, near the hostess desk or reception area, or near the entry or waiting area. The signs must be at eye level and sufficiently lit.

Besides the Morton's and Bennigan's chains, other major restaurants covered by the settlement include: Red Lobster, Ruth's Chris Steakhouse, Yard House, Chili's, Macaroni Grill, Outback Steakhouse, Benihana, Chart House, Claim Jumper, Cheesecake Factory and P.F. Chang's.

Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

Back to the top |

Home | Complaint Form | News | Recalls | FAQ |
Consumer Resources | Small Claims Guide | Lemon Law | Newsletter | Contact Us
Advertise With Us | Testimonials | Newsroom | RSS Feeds |

Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice.  ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof. 

Copyright © 2003-2008 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc.  All Rights Reserved.    The contents of this site may not be republished, reprinted, rewritten or recirculated without written permission.