Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
CommunitySub-MenuPublishersChannelsProductsSub-MenuBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAboutContactResourcesSubscribeSupport
Join
Search
Close

Addressing Adulterated Food Risk

By James Neale, Trent Taylor, Alex J. Brackett & George J. Terwilliger III on January 19, 2016
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

As we enter 2016, adulterated food-related investigations are leading the headlines—and should be leading companies in the food and beverage industry to ask what they can do to prevent and prepare for a potential outbreak on their watch or in their supply chain.

From ice cream to eggs, and melons to Mexican food, a recent spate of significant adulterated food outbreaks and related criminal investigations and prosecutions have highlighted the need for companies at every step of the nation’s food supply to be increasingly vigilant in identifying and mitigating risks relating to food-borne illness.

The Federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act (“FD&C Act”) prohibits numerous acts, including introducing or receiving food in interstate commerce that is adulterated or misbranded. Depending on the nature of the violation, the FD&C Act provides for criminal prosecutions, including for misdemeanors (for first time, unintentional violations) and felonies (for repeat or knowing violations). Criminal FD&C Act enforcement has recently resulted in convictions and significant fines for corporations, and sentences of imprisonment for individual executives—including a 28-year sentence for a former CEO in a case where prosecutors were seeking life in prison.

We can expect this trend to continue, both because of the high profile these cases generate, and because of the unique role management has in responding. For individual executives, both the FDA’s Park Doctrine and the Responsible Corporate Officer Doctrine make it possible to prosecute certain executives even “without proof that the corporate official acted with intent or even negligence, and even if such corporate official did not have any actual knowledge of, or participation in, the specific offense.” Combined with DOJ’s renewed focus on high-level individual prosecutions pursuant to the recent guidance of the Yates Memo, revelation of an adulteration or misbranding issue could present the perfect storm for executives caught unprepared.

But there are steps companies in the food and beverage industry can take in advance of a crisis to mitigate the risk one will occur, and to maximize the chances of quickly remediating its effects if it does.

  1. Periodically Assess Your Risk Profile and Compliance Program. Every company in the food and beverage industry should have a robust set of compliance tools and controls designed to identify and address risks related to misbranding and adulteration. Executives and managers at every level of the company should understand what they are, and the company should periodically review them to ensure they are appropriate and effective, well-understood and adequately enforced.
  2. Trust but Verify. It is fine to trust that your employees would never engage in the type of negligence or recklessness that is often the cause of adulteration and misbranding issues, but only if you are taking steps to confirm that belief to be true. This should include regular compliance training that gives employees at all levels the tools and knowledge to understand why compliance matters.
  3. Communicate, Enforce and Support. Employees need to hear from management that compliance matters, and see that message in action through consistent discipline against those who fail to adhere. Only then will they feel supported in making hard decisions to do the right thing, when cutting a corner could save time or money but increase safety risks.
  4. Have a Response Plan. No company sets out to put adulterated or misbranded products on the market, but all must respond when it occurs. Accordingly, most enforcement actions focus less on the fact that an outbreak or other issue has arisen, and more on how the company and its executives responded once they became aware of it. Having a response plan in place, and trusted advisors on call to assist, could mean the difference between weathering a small storm and floundering at sea.
Photo of James Neale James Neale

Jim Neale is a trial lawyer whose varied practice focuses on high-exposure cases in courts across the country. He has substantial mass tort and class action litigation experience and currently serves as co-chair of the firm’s foodborne illness litigation practice group. His first-chair…

Jim Neale is a trial lawyer whose varied practice focuses on high-exposure cases in courts across the country. He has substantial mass tort and class action litigation experience and currently serves as co-chair of the firm’s foodborne illness litigation practice group. His first-chair trial experience includes personal injury, product liability, premises liability, transportation, insurance coverage, land valuation, and ERISA cases, and he has taken dozens of cases to verdict in both state and federal courts.

Read more about James NealeEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Trent Taylor Trent Taylor
Read more about Trent TaylorEmail
Photo of Alex J. Brackett Alex J. Brackett

Alex’s practice focuses primarily on advising and supporting corporate and individual clients in the areas of white collar criminal defense and internal investigations. He has a particular focus on export control laws and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), in addition to general…

Alex’s practice focuses primarily on advising and supporting corporate and individual clients in the areas of white collar criminal defense and internal investigations. He has a particular focus on export control laws and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), in addition to general white collar defense and corporate compliance matters. His client work has taken him to 21 countries on six continents.

Read more about Alex J. BrackettEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of George J. Terwilliger III George J. Terwilliger III

George Terwilliger is co-head of the firm’s white collar practice and leads the firm’s Strategic Response and Crisis Management practice group. Having served as both a front line federal prosecutor and as Deputy Attorney General of the United States in a 15 year…

George Terwilliger is co-head of the firm’s white collar practice and leads the firm’s Strategic Response and Crisis Management practice group. Having served as both a front line federal prosecutor and as Deputy Attorney General of the United States in a 15 year public service career, George offers wide-ranging experience in civil and criminal litigation, agency enforcement proceedings, and government and internal investigations spanning over 20 years in private practice. He also has advised government officials, Congress and private organizations on national security, homeland defense, terrorism, and other public policy and legal issues.

Read more about George J. Terwilliger IIIEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Corporate Compliance, International
  • Blog:
    Subject to Inquiry
  • Organization:
    McGuireWoods LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center

New to the Network

  • Coronavirus (COVID-19): Guidance for Businesses
  • GovCon & Trade
  • Pro Policyholder
  • The Way on FDA
  • Crypto Digest
Copyright © 2022, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo