A federal court in Iowa has denied a motion seeking to preliminarily enjoin the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from enforcing regulations prohibiting the interstate sale of raw milk. Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund v. Sebelius, No. 10-4018 (N.D. Iowa, decided January 23, 2012). The plaintiffs, who either produce or consume raw milk, filed their motion under the All Writs Act, claiming that FDA has taken enforcement actions against third parties in other jurisdictions while the plaintiffs’ lawsuit challenging the validity of the rules is pending and that such action usurps the court’s jurisdiction to decide whether the interstate sale of raw milk is legal. According to the court, “[t]he plaintiffs have not cited, and I have not found, any authority for the proposition that the first federal court to entertain a challenge to a federal regulation has the power to forestall enforcement of that regulation by a federal agency in other…
Category Archives 8th Circuit
A Nebraska resident alleging that his consumption of Listeria-contaminated cantaloupe grown by Jensen Farms in Colorado caused his infection and subsequent hospitalization, has filed a personal injury action against the grower, distributor, retailer, and the company hired by the grower to conduct a food safety audit before the outbreak. Braddock v. Jensen Farms, No. 11-402 (D. Neb., filed November 30, 2011). According to the complaint, Primus Group, Inc. was negligent in performing the audit and failing to detect Listeria or conditions leading to Listeria contamination at the grower’s facilities and, in breaching its contract with the grower, harmed the plaintiff, a third-party beneficiary. The plaintiff also alleges strict product liability, breach of warranty, negligence, and negligence per se against the other defendants and seeks general, special and incidental damages.
Attorneys involved in the settlement of injury claims linked to Salmonella-contaminated eggs traced to Wright County Egg in Iowa have reportedly told the Associated Press that the first checks, issued by the egg producer’s insurer, are on their way to the first of dozens of individuals sickened during the 2010 outbreak. Among the first wave of legal settlements are six-figure checks issued on behalf of several children. Although most of the settlement’s terms are confidential, a federal judge in Iowa apparently approved deals in open court on November 10, 2011, totaling $366,000 for three children residing in California, Iowa and Texas. Because they were hospitalized, they are receiving higher amounts than those not as seriously stricken. See MSNBC. com, November 16, 2011.
Without disclosing any settlement details, Hormel Foods Corp. and a Netherlands-based company have secured a court order dismissing trademark infringement claims involving the labels for canned meat products SPAM® and Prem®. Hormel Foods, LLC v. Zwanenberg Food Group (USA), Inc., No. 11-00774 (D. Minn., order entered November 1, 2011). Additional information about the case appears in Issue 388 of this Update. Hormel brought the action, contending that the defendant had violated the Lanham Act by selling Prem canned meat with a copycat label using Hormel’s distinctive label colors. According to a news source, Prem filed a counterclaim, alleging that the two color label is not distinctive or protectable and that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office improperly registered the trademark in May 2011. See Law360, November 1, 2011.
Sholom Rubashkin, who managed a kosher meatpacking facility in Postville, Iowa, and was convicted on 86 counts related to financial fraud, lost the appeal of his conviction and the 324-month prison sentence imposed by a federal district court. United States v. Rubashkin, Nos. 10-2487/3580 (8th Cir., decided September 16, 2011). Additional details about the case appear in Issue 378 of this Update. Among other matters, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals determined that evidence indicating that the trial court judge met with prosecutors before the facility was raided by immigration officials was insufficient to show bias against Rubashkin or that “the district court’s decision to remain on the case prejudiced Rubashkin’s verdict.” The court also found no fault in the trial court severing the bank fraud charges from the immigration law violations, which the government later dismissed, and trying the bank fraud charges first. According to the appeals court, “Given…
A federal court in Arkansas has determined that Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. has a duty to defend an agricultural cooperative in more than 170 civil lawsuits filed by rice farmers over the contamination of their conventional crops with a genetically engineered (GE) variety. Riceland Foods, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., No. 10-00091 (E.D. Ark., decided June 8, 2011). The court found that while the relevant commercial general liability policies precluded coverage for cross-pollination, they were silent as to liability for the physical mixing of a contaminating crop “with conventional rice during harvest, processing, transportation, or storage,” which the plaintiffs alleged in addition to cross-pollination as an independent cause of their injury. The court held that “the duty to defend remains when cross-pollination is presented as one of several potentially independent causes of the damage.” The court also determined Liberty had no obligation to defend a European rice distributor that was sued in…
A federal court in Iowa has determined that 31 disabled men who worked at a turkey-processing plant were owed $1.7 million in back wages and liquidated damages by employers who compensated them at a rate of about $.41 per hour for years. Solis v. Hill Country Farms, Inc., No. 09-00162 (S.D. Iowa, Davenport Div., decided April 21, 2011). The recovery will compensate the workers for a three-year period. The two-year statute of limitations was extended for the defendants’ knowing and reckless disregard of federal minimum wage and overtime requirements because the Wage and Hour Division had previously investigated them for the same violations. The employees lived in a bunkhouse provided by the defendants, and their room and board expenses were deducted from their Social Security (SS) or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. Those expenses, which were increased over time, were also deducted from their pay; their take home of $65…
A Minnesota appeals court has reportedly decided a dispute over workers’ compensation deductibles in favor of a pork processing company’s insurance carrier in litigation arising from injuries to employees exposed to the mist from pig brain tissue. Quality Pork Processors Inc. is apparently considering whether to appeal the ruling to the state supreme court. According to counsel for the company, the matter involves a contractual dispute and has no effect on benefit payments to those infected while working on or near the line called the “head table.” They apparently used compressed air to remove pigs’ brains and were diagnosed with an unusual neurological disease that causes symptoms including weakness, fatigue, confusion, and seizures. The pork processor contends that the contract language addressing how deductibles were calculated is ambiguous and disagreed that each accident should be decided separately. See The Austin Daily Herald, April 14, 2011.
A federal grand jury has indicted a husband and wife who own a grain storage company in northwestern Missouri, alleging that they conspired to victimize more than 100 farmers at an estimated loss exceeding $3.1 million by selling grain the farmers owned without paying them and by commingling and embezzling the farmers’ money. United States v. Froman, No. 11-06005 (W.D. Mo., filed April 21, 2011). The indictment alleges that “grain (primarily corn and soybeans), which was owned by various farmers who contracted with Gallatin Grain, was sold by the Fromans without the farmers’ permission and the proceeds of the sale were wrongfully withheld by the Fromans.” Counts of conspiracy, mail fraud and bank fraud have been brought against both Daniel and Pauline Froman. Daniel has also been charged with one count of wire fraud and one count of interstate transportation of stolen property. Prison terms of up to 30 years…
Hormel Foods, LLC has filed a complaint in a Minnesota federal court against a company that also makes a canned meat product, alleging that the company is infringing Hormel’s SPAM® trademark, which consists of yellow lettering on a blue background. Hormel Foods, LLC v. Zwanenberg Food Group (USA), Inc., No. __ (D. Minn., filed March 30, 2011). The defendant allegedly began selling its product in October 2010 in a can with yellow labeling on a blue background. When Hormel sent a cease and desist letter, the company allegedly switched to a new design, white on a red background. Thereafter, the defendant resumed using the yellow on blue background label for products shipped to the Philippines and Japan. According to the complaint, Hormel has produced 7 billion cans of SPAM® products, making the brand “a famous American icon. Its timelessness has earned it roles in films, a fan club and a…
