Featured Case

Truthful advertising is constitutionally protected

Hahn v. California Department of Pesticide Regulation

Contact: Timothy Sandefur

Status:  Adverse decision issued by the Sacramento Superior Court on Aug. 16, 2010. Preparing for appeal.

Summary:
George Hahn owns and operates a company that sells “worm castings”—soil which has been processed by worms—which among other things operates as an insect repellent.  Hahn sells this material under the name “Worm Gold.”  He would like to advertise the insect repellent properties of Worm Gold, but in April, 2007, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) fined him for doing so, on the grounds that Worm Gold was not registered with the DPR as a pesticide.  State law requires that any “pesticide, or any substance or mixture of substances that is represented to be a pesticide” must be registered with the department before being sold.  This requirement is backed by fines and other penalties.  Accordingly, Hahn was fined $110,000 for selling Worm Gold on the internet with an advertisement stating that it deters pests. 

PLF attorneys asked the DPR to dismiss their claims against Mr. Hahn because the agency has no jurisdiction over purely natural products. The agency denied the motion and Hahn filed a writ in Sacramento County Superior Court asking the judge to order the dismissal.

On August 16, 2010, the Sacramento Superior Court issued an adverse decision, finding that Hahn had represented his fertilizer to be a pesticide by claiming that it could deter pests. PLF is preparing for appeal.