“Intentional Contamination: Liability for the Criminal Acts of Employees” is one in a series of articles that address the legal risks faced by manufacturers and distributors of food products. In this article about whether an employer is liable if an employee intentionally contaminates a product, it is explained: “The employer is vicariously liable for the negligence of its employee while on the job, which is to say the law treats the employer as if it committed the act itself. Employees or agents are merely an extension of the employing company, and that acts of one are the acts of the other.” The article appeared in an online newsletter for ID Access.
Denis Stearns, is of-counsel at Marler Clark, earned a BA in philosophy from Seattle University, and his law degree from the University of Wisconsin at Madison. He graduated from both schools with high honors, and won numerous awards for service and
A poultry company in England has disclosed how a Salmonella contamination incident will likely cost it £2.1 million ($2.8 million).
Between March 23 and April 10 this year,
Almost half of companies think food safety and health are among their biggest risks, according to a recent survey.
A total of 45 percent named these topics as their main
Danone has confirmed earlier estimates on the cost of its infant formula recall.
In January 2026, Danone announced a recall of some infant formula batches. Most of them were sold
OPINION
In an article that will soon be published in the Seattle Law Review, I take a look at food safety through the lens of the “pink slime” controversy and
“Ah, but a man’s reach should exceed his grasp, Or what’s a heaven for?”
— from Robert Browning’s “Andrea del Sarto”
Part 2: Does case law support FDA’
