MoFo Study Shows Litigation Top Concern for Consumer Products Orgs
Litigation exposure was followed by protection of brand equity and privacy and data security.
April 26, 2018 at 03:22 PM
3 minute read
Courtesy of Morrison & Foerster
Litigation exposure is among the biggest concerns for consumer products companies, according to a new report from Morrison & Foerster.
The law firm's survey, Legal Risks to Consumer Products Companies in 2018, looked at the concerns that matter to companies that manufacture electronic devices, snacks, apparel and other products.
The survey queried 60 consumer product companies in the United States with revenues ranging from $250 million to $1 billion—which Morrison & Foerster says constitutes a fifth of the total U.S. consumer products companies of that size.
Some 69 percent of the in-house counsel respondents indicated that litigation is their top concern. Protection of brand equity came in behind litigation at 60 percent, followed by privacy and data security at 56 percent.
“Consumer products companies have always faced unique legal challenges, but in-house counsel are now under more pressure than ever to protect their brand and keep their consumers' trust,” said Erin Bosman, chair of Morrison & Foerster's products liability and counseling practice, in a press release announcing the survey.
“Our survey revealed that, while reputation and litigation threats continue to grow, advancing technology like the Internet of Things has created an even more complex legal landscape that will force companies to anticipate and plan for previously unknown risks,” she added.
On the litigation front, two out of five legal departments anticipate higher litigation costs in 2018. The increase could range from 5 to 11 percent, respondents said. On top of costs, about 20 percent of legal departments expect more high-risk lawsuits this year. The in-house counsel surveyed expect suits could focus on product liability (45 percent), data privacy (44 percent) and regulatory and compliance matters (42 percent).
Respondents also indicated the most important drivers of change for their companies would be the economy (78 percent), government regulatory change (71 percent) and technological advancements (59 percent).
The survey spoke to the “expanding list of regulatory agencies” that ”will test the existing legal framework and force companies to anticipate and plan for previously unknown risks.”
“While the current federal government is unlikely to add regulations, state and local governments are taking a different approach and could implement changes on everything from climate change and nutrition to privacy and labor laws,” Julie Park, a partner in the producta liability and counseling practice, said in the press release.
Though the tide may be turning away from federal regulation, respondents were also asked to identify which agencies would be most relevant to their organizations. At the top of the list was the Federal Trade Commission, cited by 45 percent of respondents, followed by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission at 36 percent and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission at 24 percent.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
GC With Deep GM Experience Takes Legal Reins of Power Management Giant
2 minute readUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 2Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 3Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 4'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 5Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250