The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse employees in Alabama adequately alleged that their employers “encouraged or induced an alien to reside in the United States, and either knew or recklessly disregarded the fact that alien’s residence here was illegal,” thus stating the predicate act needed to bring a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Edwards v. Prime, Inc., No. 09-11699 (11th Cir., decided April 9, 2010). So ruling, the court reinstated the plaintiffs’ RICO claim against the parent company; its Birmingham, Alabama, franchisee; and the franchise owner and operator. The court did not reverse trial court rulings dismissing wage-related claims and claims of discrimination or retaliation. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants knowingly hired and employed illegal aliens, allowing them to work under the names of former Ruth’s Chris employees who were U.S. citizens and providing them with the former…
Category Archives 11th Circuit
According to a news source, some 120 of those purportedly sickened by Salmonella-contaminated peanut butter and their attorneys should soon begin receiving a share of a $12 million Hartford Insurance Co. policy held by the Peanut Corp. of America. Those sharing the settlement filed claims by October 31, 2009, as part of the company’s bankruptcy proceeding. The outbreak reportedly took the lives of nine people and sickened 700 who apparently ate peanuts and peanut paste traced to a company plant in Blakely, Georgia. See The Columbus Dispatch, February 2, 2010.
ConAgra Foods, Inc. has asked a multidistrict litigation (MDL) court to sever and transfer the claims of 68 plaintiffs from 14 different states in an action (Bowman v. ConAgra Foods, Inc.) recently filed against the company arising out of the purported Salmonella contamination of its peanut butter. In re: ConAgra Peanut Butter Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL No. 1845 (N.D. Ga., motion filed November 24, 2009). The motion is similar to one filed earlier in November. Additional details about that motion appear in issue 327 of this Update. While ConAgra does not object to the court retaining jurisdiction over the Bowman claims for purposes of pre-trial proceedings, it asks that the plaintiffs’ claims be severed and transferred for trial because they were improperly joined and “because trial of these claims as a single action is likely to result in undue prejudice to the litigants and confusion to the jury,” which would have to apply…
ConAgra Foods, Inc. has asked a multidistrict litigation (MDL) court to sever and transfer the claims of some of the plaintiffs who filed a lawsuit in October 2009 against the company arising out of the purported Salmonella contamination of its peanut butter. In re: ConAgra Peanut Butter Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL No. 1845 (N.D. Ga., motion filed November 10, 2009). The company has also asked the court to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims for punitive damages, arguing that they have not been sufficiently plead under the new plausibility standard of Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 U.S. 1937 (2009). According to ConAgra’s motion, this lawsuit involves five plaintiffs from four different states, raising serious questions of judicial economy and juror confusion, given that evidence is located in four different states and the legal standards of four different states would have to be applied to the claims. The plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in the same…
A federal court in Florida has refused to enforce a $97 million judgment obtained in a Nicaraguan court by 150 banana plantation workers who alleged that exposure to the pesticide DBCP caused their sterility. Osorio v. Dole Food Co., No. 07-22693 (S.D. Fla., decided October 20, 2009). The plaintiffs sought to enforce the award under a Florida law allowing for the recognition of out-of-country foreign money judgments. Defendants Dole Food Co. and Dow Chemical Co. contended that the Nicaraguan law under which the case was litigated, Special Law 364, violated their due process rights in a number of respects, and the court agreed, finding multiple grounds for non-recognition under the Florida statute. Among other matters, the Nicaraguan law targeted a limited number of defendants, established irrefutable presumptions about causation, restricted defendants’ ability to introduce evidence, required significant financial deposits by defendants even before liability was determined, and granted no right…
The representatives of a man who died of botulism have filed a lawsuit in federal court against Malo, Inc. and Massmann Enterprises, Inc., claiming that the companies responsible for maintaining food canning equipment at a Atlanta, Georgia, facility failed to warn owner Bumble Bee Foods, LLC about a leaky water valve . Caffrey et al. v. Malo, Inc. and Massmann Enterprises, Inc., No. 09-104 (S.D. Ga., September 2, 2009). The complaint alleges that the defendants should have known that the defective equipment would prevent the canning process from achieving the high temperatures and pressures necessary for sterilization. The malfunction purportedly resulted in the distribution of botulism-tainted chili, beef stew and hot dog chili sauce that led to the death of Jeffrey Caffrey in September 2007. The sister and mother of the deceased are reportedly seeking $13.5 million for negligence, wrongful death, product liability, pain and suffering, and loss of consortium. See…
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that a district court did not abuse its discretion by deciding that the Alien Tort Claims Act and Torture Victim Protection Act claims of seven Guatemalan banana plantation workers would best be heard in a Guatemalan court. Aldana v. Del Monte Fresh Produce N.A., Inc., No 07-15471 (11th Cir., decided August 13, 2009). The litigation arose from a 1999 labor dispute in Guatemala during which a number of trade union workers were allegedly roughed up by a private security force purportedly hired by defendant’s subsidiary, which owned the large banana plantation involved in the dispute. A circuit court panel majority agreed with the district court’s forum non conveniens analysis, ruling that it did not err by giving preclusive effect to prior state court findings on these issues and in finding that Guatemala’s courts were adequate and that “the plaintiffs’ choice of forum…
A woman who alleges that General Mills, Inc. deceives the public by claiming its Yo-Plus® probiotic yogurt is beneficial for human digestion has filed a motion for class certification in a federal court in Florida. Fitzpatrick v. General Mills, Inc., No. 09-60412 (S.D. Fla., filed August 4, 2009). More information about the litigation appears in issue 296 of this Update. The plaintiff contends that the company cannot substantiate its claims that the yogurt’s trademarked “unique blend of live probiotic cultures and natural fiber,” “helps keep your digestive system right on track.” She seeks damages in excess of $5 million, alleging that consumers paid premium prices for a product that has upset the yogurt market and gained a significant market share. Relying on a favorable class certification ruling in similar litigation against Dannon Co., Inc. in California, the plaintiff contends that the claims readily meet Rule 23 class certification requirements. She…
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has turned aside a constitutional challenge to the statutory damages provisions of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act in litigation against a food establishment that allegedly printed more than the last five digits of a customer’s credit card number on an electronically generated receipt. Harris v. Mexican Specialty Foods, Inc., Nos. 08-13510 & -13616 (11th Cir., decided April 9, 2009). The district court had granted the merchants’ motions for summary judgment and dismissed the claims with prejudice, after finding the statutory damages provision unconstitutionally vague and excessive. According to the appeals court, which addressed only the facial challenge to the law, by providing for a range of damages (from $100 to $1,000), the law does not deprive potential defendants of notice of the consequences of violations or result in arbitrarily assessed damages awards. The court remanded the litigation for further proceedings.
Bumble Bee Foods, LLC has filed a complaint in federal court against the company that made the food-sterilization system used to process Castleberry hot dog chili sauce that, in 2007, was contaminated with Clostridium botulinum and led to a nationwide recall of under-processed products. Bumble Bee Foods, LLC v. Malo, Inc., No. 09-042 (S.D. Ga., filed March 26, 2009). Alleging negligent design, failure to warn and negligence, Bumble Bee describes the factory-equipment defect that resulted in incomplete sterilization of its subsidiary’s canned foods. The food manufacturer claims that its 2007 product recall, a two-month plant shutdown and a number of claims filed by individuals who purportedly contracted botulism as a result of eating the tainted products cost the company in excess of $40 million. The complaint alleges that the defendant was aware of the defects “but took no steps either to correct these defects or to advise Bumble Bee or…
