CALL 916-777-7777
Youtube Facebook-f X-twitter Linkedin-in

Sacramento Food Poisoning Attorneys

FREE EVALUATION (916) 777-7777

Contaminated food hospitalizes over 325,000 people every year, with approximately 5,000 people losing their lives each year due to severe bouts of food poisoning.

If you or a loved one may have been the victim of foodborne illness, our food poisoning attorneys in Sacramento can help you understand the rights you have as a consumer. You may be eligible to receive compensation for your injuries. We offer free case assessments and only get paid if we recover compensation for your claim.

To find out how we can help, call us today at (916) 777-7777 and let us review the details of your claim for free.

"*" indicates required fields

Address*
SMS*
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

SETTLEMENT

$60,000,000

Data Breach

The Arnold Law Firm reached a settlement in the Morgan Stanley data breach class action lawsuit.

Learn More

SETTLEMENT

$18,276,000

Qui Tam / Whistleblower

A whistleblower case exposing fraudulent practices in the state of California resulted…
Learn More

SETTLEMENT

$17,000,000

Data Breach

The Arnold Law Firm reached a settlement in the Kemper and Infinity data breach…
Learn More

SETTLEMENT

$17,000,000

Data Breach

The Arnold Law Firm reached a settlement in the Kemper and Infinity data breach…
Learn More

SETTLEMENT

$8,000,000

Truck Accident

Late one spring afternoon, the Arnold Law Firm received a call from Angela, a young…
Learn More

JUDGEMENT

$3,900,000

Car Accident

The fatal collision between plaintiff’s Jeep Liberty and defendant’s Volvo truck…
Learn More

Sources of Food Poisoning and Foodborne Illnesses

Due to the number of people that can handle food during its transition from the producer to the consumer, it can be very difficult to determine where foodborne illnesses originate.

In fact, it often takes the knowledge of experienced investigators to trace the origins of a particular outbreak back to its original source.

If you have been a victim of a food poisoning, there are a number of sources that can be investigated and potentially held accountable for your illness. Our team of lawyers and industry experts can help to explore these areas and use the information that we uncover to build a case for your compensation.

Some of these can include:

  • Farmers
  • Ranchers
  • Slaughterhouses
  • Food processing plants
  • Packaging facilities
  • Distributors

…. just to name a few.

If improperly stored food is sold by retailers, such as grocery stores or restaurants, those establishments may also be responsible for foodborne illness.

"*" indicates required fields

Address*
SMS*
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Foods That Are More Susceptible to Carrying Bacteria

With the advent of large scale farming, the chances of food products becoming contaminated has increased greatly.

This has been compounded by the various chemicals and other dangerous ingredients that are often used in the fertilizers and pesticides that are used on many crops throughout the country.

While poultry and beef are the most common sources of food poisoning cases, there are a number of other products that can carry the bacteria that can poison those that consume them.

Some of these include (but are not limited to):

  • Tuna
  • Eggs
  • Leafy greens
  • Cheese
  • Peanut butter
  • Oysters
  • Potatoes
  • Ice cream
  • Berries
  • Sprouts

In light of the above, it is important to look closely at all of the food that you purchase and where you purchase it from, to try and minimize your chances of getting sick from eating your food.

Common Bacteria Found in Food Poisoning Cases

Foodborne diseases are generally caused by foods or beverages having been exposed to or have been contaminated by a dangerous fungus or microbe.

As farming techniques have developed and the sizes of our crops and abattoirs have increased over time, a large variety of disease-causing microbes, or pathogens have also developed and begun to contaminate our food supply. In some instances, these are also water borne, so that in effect, as the crops and livestock are consuming the water that is available to them, they are also ingesting these organisms.

According to the CDC, some of the most common microbes include (but are not limited to):

  • Campylobacter: The worlds most commonly identified cause of bacterial illness.  Persons infected with Campylobacter typically experience fever, diarrhea and cramps.  Most infections are caused by consumption of undercooked chicken, because the bacteria naturally live in the intestines of birds.  Most cases are minor and treatable with rest and fluid intake.  Campylobacteriosis is estimated to affect 2.4 million Americans every year.
  • Salmonella: The bacterium which causes salmonellosis, whose symptoms typically include fever, diarrhea, and cramps.  In some cases, the bacterium can invade the bloodstream and cause serious infections.  Most victims are ill for 4-7 days and recover without medical treatment.  A small number of infections lead to Reiter’s syndrome, which can develop into chronic arthritis.  Salmonellosis can be avoided by thoroughly cooking foods and washing ones hands after handling reptiles, birds or their excrement.
  • E. coli O157:H7: A pathogen commonly found in cattle, often transmitted to humans who consume food contaminated with small amounts of cow feces.  Symptoms include severe diarrhea and cramps.  The bacterium causes illness by producing a toxin called Shiga toxin.  Treatment with antibiotics is not thought to be helpful.
  • Calicivirus: One of the most common causes of the stomach flu.” The virus commonly causes acute vomiting and is frequently transferred to food from an infected kitchen worker. The virus can also be spread person-to-person. Treatment mainly consists of the prevention of dehydration, which most victims will recover from on their own. Infections typically last 1 to 10 days, depending on which strain of virus caused the illness.

It’s important to note that most cases of foodborne illnesses are preventable simply by processing and preparing food in a hygienic environment. Unfortunately, there are often many steps in the production and distribution of food and food products where contamination can occur.

WE FIGHT FOR YOUR MAXIMUM INJURY COMPENSATION

Free Case Evaluation
CALL 916-777-7777

How An Attorney Can Help

Most Americans will remember the highly publicized salmonella peanut butter outbreak of 2009, when unsanitary manufacturing conditions at peanut butter facilities were linked to salmonella infections in peanut butter consumers.

These infections are reminders that foodborne illness continues to be a serious problem in the United States.

If you or a loved one has been the victim of a foodborne illness, consider employing the services of a competent personal injury attorney in Sacramento. Your lawyer will be able to trace the origins of the defective items and pinpoint who was responsible for making you sick.

At the Arnold Law Firm, our team of attorneys work with a number of industry professionals to help determine who is at fault as quickly as possible. We then use this information to help build a robust argument for your compensation claim.

"*" indicates required fields

Address*
SMS*
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Contact Our Law Firm Today

Have you or someone you love suffered from a food poisoning incident? If so, we can help explore your legal options and determine if you have grounds to file a damages lawsuit.

With a team consisting of over 15 attorneys and 23 staff members, we have approximately 200 years of combined experience and have won MILLIONS in successful verdicts and settlements for our clients.

With our main office located on Howe Avenue in Sacramento, for more than three decades the law offices of the Arnold Law Firm have been proudly fighting for the rights of injury victims throughout Sacramento County.

To find out more, please contact us at (916) 777-7777. A member from our intake staff will quickly collect some information about your case then refer you to one of our attorneys to discuss the merits of your claim.

LATEST NEWS

Treble Damages in California Trucking Cases

justice4you January 30, 2026

California law provides a specific statutory remedy for victims injured by impaired commercial vehicle drivers when their employers fail to meet federal safety requirements. Understanding when treble damages apply—and how they differ from standard punitive damages—is crucial for truck accident victims seeking maximum compensation. What Are Treble Damages? Treble damages allow injured parties to recover three times their actual damages under specific legal circumstances. In California trucking cases, this remedy is narrowly defined and differs significantly from general punitive damages available in other personal injury cases. California Civil Code § 3333.7: Statutory Treble Damages Requirements for Recovery Under California Civil Code § 3333.7, injured parties may recover treble damages from a commercial motor vehicle driver’s employer when all of the

California Trucking Accidents: Standards of Care

justice4you January 29, 2026

California law establishes different standards of care for trucking operations depending on the type of service provided. While most commercial trucking companies transporting freight are subject to ordinary negligence standards, federal motor carrier safety regulations impose enhanced duties that can significantly affect liability in truck accident cases. Key Takeaways: Commercial carriers of goods generally DO NOT have the duty of “utmost care” Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) DO create heightened standards in specific situations Large truck drivers must exercise greater caution than ordinary motorists Licensed motor carriers have nondelegable safety duties Common Carrier Standard: When Does “Utmost Care” Apply? The Enhanced Duty for Passenger Transportation California Civil Code section 2100 requires carriers of persons for reward to use “the

Punitive Damages in California Personal Injury Cases

justice4you January 28, 2026

What Are Punitive Damages? Punitive damages are extra money a court can order a wrongdoer to pay, on top of the money that compensates an injured person for medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering. The main goal of punitive damages is not to repay the victim, but to punish especially bad behavior and to discourage similar conduct in the future. Think of punitive damages as a financial penalty for conduct that is much worse than ordinary carelessness. In California, punitive damages are not common. They are reserved for cases where the defendant’s conduct is particularly harmful, intentional, or shows a conscious disregard for the safety or rights of others. Most personal injury cases involve simple negligence (for example,

Settlement - $3,900,000

Car Accident

The fatal collision between plaintiff’s Jeep Liberty and defendant’s Volvo truck left Ryan Eisenbrandt’s surviving wife and parents with a judgment of $3.9 million, but the defendant’s insurance company refused to pay. This resulted in a second, intense legal battle between Plaintiffs and Defendant’s insurance company.

During the pendency of the wrongful death case, Defendant’s insurance company had filed a federal court action to rescind the defendants $1,000,000 insurance policy, claiming that defendant had made misrepresentations when applying for that policy. Initially, the federal court agreed with the insurance company, granting summary judgment that effectively denied recovery to the Eisenbrandts given the defendant was otherwise insolvent. The Arnold firm and the Eisenbrandts refused to accept this unfair outcome. They appealed the federal judge’s ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth Circuit reversed the lower court and sent the case back to the same federal judge for a trial on the merits.

Christine Doyle of the Arnold Firm tried the case in February 2011 in front of the same judge who had previously thrown out the Eisenbrandt’s case. A unanimous advisory jury and the trial judge, after hearing the true facts about the insurance company’s effort to avoid responsibility, found in the Eisenbrandts favor. After four years of fighting for what is right, the insurance company was ordered to pay up.

Settlement - $8,000,000

Truck Accident

Morgan Stanley Class Action Data Breach Settlement Attained by the Arnold Law Firm

Late one spring afternoon, the Arnold Law Firm received a call from Angela, a young mother of three. She was calling from the hospital where her husband Christopher had been air-lifted for treatment of severe injuries from a tragic motor vehicle accident earlier that day. Angela’s mother, a past client of our firm, had encouraged her to give us a call.

As it turns out, Angela’s prompt contact with us was a very important decision for their family. Immediate representation allowed our team to secure critical evidence right away — appropriate storage and analysis of the vehicle to avoid tampering, timely professional photography of the scene, and interviews of involved parties — which ended up being imperative to the details of Christopher’s case.

A commercial vehicle had failed to stop at a rural stop-sign intersection, colliding with the compact sedan driven by Christopher, an active 33-year-old father. The impact caused extensive damage to his spinal cord in the cervical area. Despite multiple surgeries, rehabilitation programs for physical and psychological therapy, and in-home care, his injuries rendered him a paraplegic, paralyzed from the mid-chest. In an instant, life as he had known it was gone forever.

At the time of the accident, the at-fault driver of the commercial vehicle was acting within the scope of his employment with a large corporation. With the employer being directly liable, as such, defense counsel fought hard to minimize Christopher’s damages, claiming that his being unemployed at that time devalued his losses. Our legal team made sure Christopher’s true losses were represented, including his potential income, his options and mobility, his ability to provide for and support his family, and the lifetime of care he now needed. Christopher’s injuries also dramatically affected his spouse’s daily life, resulting in a claim on her behalf.

Furthermore, the extent of Christopher’s injuries were, in part, due to defects involving the dual-restraint system in his own vehicle. Despite the manufacturer’s efforts to deny any responsibility, the Arnold Law Firm established negligence relevant to his case.

The result was a settlement of $8 million — the largest pre-trial settlement for this type of case in the region. Christopher now has the resources to receive the ongoing care he now requires, improve the quality of his life and take care of his young family.

Verdict - $10,200,000

Motorcycle Accident

The Arnold Law Firm is pleased to report that our attorneys received a $10.2 million verdict handed down in Modesto. Defense counsel was Kevin Cholakian of San Francisco. The defense rejected a 998 within the $1 million policy limits three years ago. The highest defense offer was $350k.

The case involved a blind corner dirt fire road collision between a truck driven by the defendant and a motorcycle driven by the plaintiff Dan Nixon. THe plaintiff had no recollection of the collision. The defendant claimed that the plaintiff had too much speed for the corner and lost control. The plaintiff’s son (who identified the wrong curve in discovery) claimed that the defendant was on the wrong side of the curve, causing his dad to make an unsuccessful emergency maneuver. The jury assessed 70% fault to the defendant and 30% to plaintiff.

The plaintiff, now 50-years-old, suffered a dislocated right knee with popliteal artery rupture which has left him with an unstable knee, and permanently damaged lower leg. Because of vascular damage he is not a candidate for knee reconstruction or replacement. The plaintiff’s treating doctors testified that he will require an above knee amputation within 20 years. Past lost wages were $78,000 and past medicals were $570,000. The jury awarded $7.5 million in general damages (3 m. past and 4.5 m. future) as well as all future economic damages asked for by the plaintiff. The jury deliberated for 3 and a half hours.

Settlement - $17,000,000

Data Breach

Infinity/Kemper Class Action Data Breach Settlement Attained by the Arnold Law Firm

The Arnold Law Firm, along with co-counsel at Morgan & Morgan, and Mason, Lietz, & Klinger, and Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman, & Herz LLP, reached a settlement in the Kemper and Infinity data breach class action lawsuit, also known as Irma Carrera et al. v. Kemper Corporation and Infinity Insurance Company, filed in the United States District Court Northern District of Illinois, Case No. 1:20-cv-01883. The settlement is valued at over $17 million.

The Honorable Judge Martha M. Pacold granted Preliminary Approval of the settlement on October 27, 2021.

In addition to substantial injunctive relief, the class members will receive access to Aura’s Financial Shield Services for a period of 18 months, up to $10,000 for reimbursement of documented out-of-pocket losses reasonably traceable to the Data Breach, up to 3 hours of time spent remedying issues related to the breach at $18 per hour, and $50 for Class Members who are California residents.

History of the data breach: On April 8, 2021, the Arnold Law Firm and Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman, & Herz LLP filed the first class action complaint against Kemper and Infinity in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois entitled Irma Carrera Aguallo et al. v. Kemper Corporation and Infinity Insurance Company, Case No. 1:21-cv-01883. The complaint asserted claims against Defendants for: (1) negligence; (2) negligence per se, (3) violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq. – Unlawful Business Practices, (4) violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq. – Unfair Business Practices, (5) violation of the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.100, et seq., (6) violation of California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1750, et seq., (7) violation of Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, Florida Statute § 501.201, et seq., (8) breach of implied contract, (9) declaratory judgment, and (10) unjust enrichment arising from the data breach.

Settlement - $18,276,000

Qui Tam / Whistleblower

Whistleblowers Represented by Arnold Law Firm Expose Fraudulent Practices by the Pill Club, Case Settled With California DOJ

The Arnold Law Firm and the Hirst Law Group represented two whistleblowers who helped expose fraudulent practices by a start-up online pharmacy company called The Pill Club.

The company allegedly used fraudulent practices to bill California’s Medicaid program, Medi-Cal, for their services. The Pill Club is also alleged to have violated state laws by allowing nurse practitioners to prescribe contraceptive products to women without proper supervision or training from a licensed medical doctor.

For their part in blowing the whistle on the company they worked for, and as part of California Qui Tam laws, the whistleblowers and their attorneys recovered $4.9 million from the $18.275 million settlement paid to the California Department of Justice (DOJ) and the California Department of Insurance (CDI).

Settlement - $60,000,000

Data Breach

Morgan Stanley Class Action Data Breach Settlement Attained by the Arnold Law Firm

The Arnold Law Firm, along with co-counsel at Morgan & Morgan, Nussbaum Law Group, P.C. and others, reached a settlement in the Morgan Stanley data breach class action lawsuit, also known as In re Morgan Stanley Data Security Litigation, filed in the United States District Court Southern District of New York, Case No. 1:20-cv-05914-AT. The settlement resulted in a $60 million settlement fund to benefit class members.

The Motion for Preliminary Approval was filed on December 31, 2021 with the Honorable Judge Analisa Torres.

In addition to substantial injunctive relief, the 15 million class members will be provided access to Aura’s Financial Shield services for at least two years, which includes a $1 million insurance policy protecting each subscriber, credit monitoring, identity freezing, dark web monitoring, income tax protection and more services. The fund will also provide payments to people who submit valid claims for out-of-pocket expenses and/or up to four hours of lost-time incurred as a result of the data breach. Lost time allows victims of the data breach to be paid at $25 per hour for up to four hours of attested time spent dealing with the data breach. Out-of-pocket expenses can be claimed up to $10,000 if the costs or expenditures are fairly traceable to the data breach.

History of the data breach: On July 29, 2020, the Arnold Law Firm and Morgan & Morgan filed the first class action lawsuit against Morgan Stanley in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entitled Sylvia Tillman et al. v. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, LLC., Case No. 1:20-cv-05914. The complaint asserted claims against Defendants for: (1) negligence; (2) invasion of privacy; (3) negligence per se; (4) unjust enrichment; (5) violation of the California Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq. – Unlawful Business Practices; and (6) violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq. – Unfair Business Practices.

Settlement - $3,767,000

Truck Accident

A 20-year-old man who had been married for just 12 days left home on his way to work. He was driving on Pleasant Grove Road in Sutter County in the early morning when he came upon a slow-moving truck. As he pulled out to pass the truck, the truck driver turned left in front of him. The young man attempted to steer back into his lane but his vehicle struck an un-flagged piece of metal extending from the back of the truck. He died in the resulting crash.

Expert witnesses brought in by the Arnold Law Firm proved that the truck, owned and operated by a hauling firm, should never have been on the highway that morning. Specifically, the rear and side turn signals did not work and the rear-view mirror was in a poor state of adjustment at the time of the collision. As a result, the driver, who had failed to properly inspect the vehicle before setting out that morning, couldn’t see the young man’s vehicle as it attempted to pass.

The poor condition of the truck, its lack of maintenance and the manner in which it was operated were found to be substantial factors in causing the collision that killed the young man. The testimony also established that the man had been making a lawful pass at the lawful speed limit and acted reasonably when he attempted to avoid the collision.

The man’s 20-year-old widow was awarded $3,767,000.77, his parents were awarded $185,131 and the family was reimbursed $11,899 in funeral expenses. Though money is a poor substitute for a young man’s life, this verdict demonstrates that drivers who endanger the lives of others will be held accountable for their actions.