A federal court in Idaho has denied all pending motions to dismiss in litigation brought by direct and indirect potato purchasers who allege that the defendants violated antitrust laws by agreeing to reduce the supply of potatoes in the United States to increase their price. In re Fresh & Process Potatoes Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 10-2186 (D. Idaho, filed July 27, 2012). The plaintiffs contend that the defendants formed cooperatives which agreed to limit crop acreage and paid farmers to destroy existing potatoes or refrain from growing additional potatoes. Assessing the allegations in the plaintiffs’ amended complaint, the court determined that they met the plausibility pleading standard required under the U.S. Supreme Court’s Twombly and Iqbal rulings.

About The Author

For decades, manufacturers, distributors and retailers at every link in the food chain have come to Shook, Hardy & Bacon to partner with a legal team that understands the issues they face in today's evolving food production industry. Shook attorneys work with some of the world's largest food, beverage and agribusiness companies to establish preventative measures, conduct internal audits, develop public relations strategies, and advance tort reform initiatives.

Close