Lawsuit relief for business at last.

For the first time in recent memory, legislation that will limit civil lawsuits against California businesses has been enacted.

AB 1394 (Figueroa/Escutia) reforms California's "slack fill" packaging law, which makes it a crime to have "non-functional slack fill" (or empty space) in a retail package.

This new law represents the culmination of intensive negotiations among the California District Attorney's Association, the Consumer Attorneys of California, environmental groups, consumer groups and the business community. The measure passed both houses of the Legislature with strong bipartisan support.

Current law, the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act, is intended to protect purchasers against deception or misrepresentation.

The law states that packages and their labels should enable consumers to obtain accurate information as to the quantity of the contents of packages in order to facilitate value comparisons.

But the statute has led to the filing of a number of nuisance lawsuits against companies in several industries, including software, toys, soaps and detergents, and cosmetics.

In fact, Albany, Calif. attorney William Henley has gone so far as to form a litigation company called "Intervention Inc." to sue software manufacturers.

Each of his complaints against software makers demands $1 million in restitution and attorneys' fees. According to an interview with him in the Los Angeles Times, he had planned to "start with nine (software) defendants and to spread the litigation out over the whole industry."

Lawsuits targeting computer software and hardware packages are particularly egregious because there is obviously no deception; anyone buying the product knows that he or she is getting a diskette or CD-ROM and an instruction manual.

This new law prevents abusive lawsuits against high-tech companies by exempting such products from the purview of the statute.

Examples of lawsuits against other major industries include the following:

* Toys - One company was sued for slack fill in its toy building sets. The boxes that contained the sets were uniform in size and contained 29 to 33 pieces, depending upon the set. Each box contained an "actual size" representation of the pieces and a clear and conspicuous disclosure as to the number of pieces therein.