Archive for the ‘ca’ tag
Attorney Listing California
Attorney Listing California
California Food & Wine Attorney Analyzes the New Country of Origin Labeling Law (cool)
If you live anywhere in California, whether it is in farming areas such as the Central Valley, the Imperial Valley or the Coachella Valley, or in cities such as Palm Springs, Palm Desert, Coachella, Thermal, La Quinta, Brawley, Fresno, La Jolla, Del Mar, Encinitas, Carlsbad, San Marcos, Vista, Escondido, San Diego, Huntington Beach, Westminster, Buena Park, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Costa Mesa, Irvine, Newport Beach, Corona del Mar, Laguna Beach, or Laguna Hills. Whether you work in Orange County, CA, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Yorba Linda, Fullerton, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Riverside, San Bernardino, Temecula, Santa Ynez or Santa Barbara you will be surprised to see a change at the stores when you buy food and drink, or other agricultural products.
The change has to do with a new regulation in food law. California food and agriculture lawyers won’t be in the produce aisle. And California agricultural attorneys won’t be lurking near the beer and wine. California personal injury attorneys may not even be looking for slip and fall accident victims. But the change will please customers who care where their food comes from.
Until now, most consumers had no idea from which country the food they were eating came from. With the new COOL (Country of Origin Labeling) law taking effect after September 30, 2008, all that will change, with a few exceptions and a few quirks.
Now when you buy that apple, pick up a package of most meats, or bag a head of lettuce, you will be able to glean from either a label, sticker or notice of some kind what country it came from. Unfortunately, as of yet, the law does not extend to dairy products.
The law also does not apply to organ meats such as heart, liver or kidney.The law also provides exceptions for processed foods such as bacon or foods that are mixed together such as peas and carrots, but it’s likely to help consumers feel much safer in being able to avoid food from certain countries, especially during food poisoning outbreaks, and feel better able to buy American if they want to.
There are also exceptions in COOL for butchers, fish markets, restaurants, restaurants in hotels, school cafeterias, and small retailers. Additionally if spices, sauce or breading has been added, no labeling is required. Though not exactly food, the law also does not apply to pharmaceuticals, though there are calls to extend the law to them. Produce mixed in displays may simply be labeled as being “from two or more countries of origin.”
There are other discrepancies with how the law will be applied. Fish caught off the coast of Alaska by a Chinese or Japanese owned ship may be labeled as a product of China or Japan. Beef raised in another country that spends 30 days in a feed lot in the U.S. can be labeled as coming from the U.S.
Consumers are likely going to be surprised when they see how much of their food is imported. “I’ve been eating this?” and “This comes from what country?” will likely be heard by check out clerks as consumers stand in line and look over the new labels.
It has been suggested by some that it was meat packers who didn’t want the obligation to sort out cattle from Canada and Mexico, who are the reason why at least to start, beef may be labeled with just a North American country of origin label, as opposed to a U.S. country of origin label. Sadly, with this country’s lack of geographical knowledge (just watch Jay Leno when he asks people on the street where Canada is), many people will assume that “North American” means that the beef couldn’t possibly have come from outside the U.S., much less Mexico.
Retailers are given discretion how they label the food. Meat counters, for instance, may simply list all the countries where the meat is produced, or they can label each cut. Hamburger will still likely give the consumer pause as meat that is ground up may come from numerous countries.
About the Author
Sebastian Gibson graduated cum laude at UCLA in 1972 and received two law degrees in the U.S. and the U.K., graduating with an LL.B. magna cum laude from University College, Cardiff in Wales and a J.D. from the University of San Diego School of Law in Southern California.
Visit our website at http://www.californiaattorneyslawyers.com . If you have an agriculture, agricultural or food and wine legal matter anywhere in Southern California, we have the knowledge and resources to represent you as your Coachella Valley Agriculture Lawyer and California Food & Wine Attorney in and around cities such as the Coachella Valley, San Diego, Orange County, Palm Springs, Corona del Mar, Laguna Beach, Palm Desert, Long Beach, Santa Ana, Anaheim, Riverside, Chula Vista, Irvine, San Bernardino, Huntington Beach, Fontana, Moreno Valley, Oceanside, Rancho Cucamonga, Ontario, Garden Grove, Del Mar, Palmdale, Corona, Escondido, Orange, Fullerton, Costa Mesa, Victorville, Carlsbad, Temecula, Murrieta, Mission Viejo, El Cajon, Vista, Westminster, Santa Monica, Santa Barbara, Hesperia, Newport Beach, Buena Park, Indio, Coachella, Rancho Mirage, Indian Wells, La Quinta, Brawley, Thermal, Laguna Beach, Dana Point, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, San Luis Obispo and Cambria.
Has Obama’s real Birth Certificate been found ?
A Kenyan birth certificate listing the birth of Barrack Hussien Obama jr has been placed under seal by a California District Court. Two motions to dismiss were refused by Judge David O Carter. The attorneys presenting the motion on the behalf of President Barrack Obama appeared to be visibly shaken as they left the courtroom. A trial has been set for January 26th 2010.
You can find it on a web site called American Grand Jury
Welll, that’s a bit off. Your account was written by one of the plaintiffs, so it’s a bit biased.
The case is Barnett v Obama (formerly Keyes v Obama). Sept 8th was a hearing to do some procedural housekeeping. At that hearing, the Plaintiffs (led by Orly Taitz) lost on 2 of the 3 issues, and managed to finally serve the Defendants after 8 months of screwing it up. The court then tentatively scheduled the rest of the milestones in the case, including trial for January 26th assuming that the case survives that long. (That’s standard for court cases.)
No motions to dismiss were refused as the MTD hearing is October 5th. The US attorneys (who are defending Obama and the other Defendents) weren’t shaken at all — the hearing went exactly as they expected. Well not exactly — the judge praised them for helping nurse the case along by helping Dr. Taitz actually serve them with the papers. And the judge refused to listen to Dr Taitz when she said she had brought a witness to testify (Lucas Smith). He also made Dr. Taitz and Gary Kreep work together in spite of their hating each other.
The Kenyan BC, allegedly obtained by convicted forger Lukas Smith, was filed in the case (not under seal) not as a valid BC, but to show that rumors of such a thing exist and that the court should compel the State Department to ask Kenya to find it. The US Attorneys aren’t worried about it at all.
I predict the case will be dismissed October 5th, because the court has no jurisdiction. The Constitution says who can qualify the president (the Electoral College and the Congress) and who can remove him (the Congress). Separation of Powers — no court has jurisdiction. That’s why these cases keep getting dismissed.
Search Engine Optimization – SEO – Los Angeles lawyers