Dedicated to the environment

Sriracha factory adds to heat over environmental case with banner

On Behalf of | Dec 4, 2013 | Environmental Law |

In a past post, we shared how residents who live by the factory that makes the popular Sriracha sauce filed a lawsuit to try to stop or at least change the production of the condiment product. Why? As we shared about a month ago, residents in the nearby neighborhood complained that the production was making it uncomfortable to live in the area.

A judge heard the lawsuit and ruled in favor of the plaintiffs last week. He ordered the factory to stop any production process that might be putting the chemical in the air that residents allege causes them headaches, watery eyes and other discomfort. What was the company’s response?

Some might see it fitting that a company that profits from a spicy product would come back with a spicy response. NPR shows a picture of the outside of the factory in which a banner is posted before the building. It reads, “No tear gas made here.”

As for official announcements regarding the company’s legal plan, there is none. Perhaps the banner’s message suggests that the business will appeal last week’s ruling. However, NPR also reports that the company has indicated how its process involving hot peppers is seasonal and has passed. That could mean the business has no reason to fight back, at least until next year.

Sriracha has grown and grown in popularity recently. For example, Subway offers a line of sandwiches built around the hot sauce. However delicious the condiment might be, the factory still has responsibilities and must comply with environmental orders, including public nuisance laws. When there is an update in this case we will share it on this blog.

Someone or a community that believes their ability to enjoy their environment is being lessened by another party can discuss the sensitive matter with an environmental lawyer who understands the value of protecting the land and quality of life overall.

Source: NPR, “Sriracha Maker Has A Saucy Response To Judge’s Ruling,” Kat Chow, Dec. 3, 2013


FindLaw Network