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…
Category Archives Litigation
South Carolina poultry production line workers have reportedly sued their employer, claiming they are not paid for the time they spend donning and removing safety gear. According to a news source, the complaint alleges that this can extend a worker’s shift by some 75 minutes each day. The employees also alleged that they are required to stand in line before clocking in to start their shifts so they can purchase the protective gear they need, such as gloves, hair nets, face masks, earplugs, and arm sleeves. Apparently, this gear is damaged regularly while in use, so the workers must buy the supplies at the worksite with a company debit card several times each week. The employer has reportedly countered that it “does not consider time spent in line for supplies and time donning and doffing the minimal gear as compensable time.” According to the company, which was recently indicted for…
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…
An industry trade group has sued Cal/EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to stop it from listing styrene as a carcinogen under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65). Styrene Info. & Research Ctr. v. OEHHA, No. 09-53089 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., filed 07/15/09). According to the complaint, styrene does not cause human cancer, and its proposed Prop. 65 listing would cause the $28-billion-a-year industry “irreparable harm” by stigmatizing the chemical. It also alleges that OEHHA failed to comply with administrative procedures in interpreting and implementing Prop. 65, created secret interpretative standards and refused to consider new scientific evidence indicating that styrene is not “known to cause cancer.” Styrene is used in milk and egg cartons, berry baskets, produce shipping crates, foodservice containers, plastic pipes, automobile parts, medical equipment, countertops, and many other products. To support its proposed styrene listing, OEHHA cited a 2002 International…
The Center for Biological Diversity has sent a 60-day notice of intent to sue letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claiming that the agency has failed to take required action under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to further the polar bear’s conservation when making decisions about the use of pesticides and herbicides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). According to the July 8, 2009, letter, the polar bear was designated an endangered species in May 2008, and the ESA requires the EPA to consider protected species when registering pesticides under FIFRA. The center contends that many of the pesticides registered in the United States “are known likely to affect the polar bear” and that EPA has failed to comply with its consultation and review obligations as to more than 35 organophosphates, many of which have apparently been detected in the Arctic. Listed are chlorpyrifos, diazinon, disulfoton,…
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has decided to rehear a case involving the interpretation of the Packers and Stockyards Act as applied to contracts between chicken growers and a processor. Wheeler v. Pilgrim’s Pride Corp., No. 07-40651 (5th Cir., decided July 27, 2009). In 2008, a three-judge circuit panel decided that the law does not require proof of an adverse effect on competition, creating a split with other circuit courts that had considered the question. The issue arose when chicken growers complained that the processor for whom they raised chickens gave preferential treatment and thus greater compensation to one grower. According to the earlier opinion, the other circuit courts have mistakenly looked to legislative history and policy issues to interpret the law, which the Fifth Circuit panel believed was clear and unambiguous. The case will be considered by the entire Fifth Circuit court on rehearing.
A federal court in California has denied the motion to dismiss filed by Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. in litigation filed by Pom Wonderful LLC alleging that the company’s false advertising for a cranberry-pomegranate juice violates federal and state law and constitutes unfair competition. Pom Wonderful LLC v. Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc., No. 09-00565 (C.D. Cal., decided July 16, 2009). Pom Wonderful alleges that Ocean Spray’s product contains little pomegranate juice, costs less to produce and thus unfairly competes with its own and other competitors’ pomegranate juices. The complaint also contends that marketing the Ocean Spray product as high in antioxidants misrepresents the product because “in fact the Beverage does not contain high levels of antioxidants.” The court rejected Ocean Spray’s assertions that (i) the false advertising claims brought under the Lanham Act are precluded or barred by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations;…
A federal court in California has denied the request for class certification filed by plaintiffs who allege that Van’s International Foods falsely advertised its frozen waffle products by listing incorrect nutritional information in their labels. Hodes v. Van’s Int’l Foods, No. 09-1530 (C.D. Cal, decided July 23, 2009). While the court found that the claims met the numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation requirements of Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it found that the named plaintiffs failed to satisfy Rule 23(b)(3). According to the court, common questions of law and fact do not predominate over individualized issues, and the class action device is not superior to other methods for adjudicating the controversy. The named plaintiffs had sought to certify a nationwide class of consumers, and the court was concerned about the manageability of the class action, stating, “the Court has concerns about how Plaintiffs will identify each…
A federal court in the District of Columbia has dismissed claims that the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) violates a number of federal and state laws, including a religious freedom statute and constitutional protections. Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund v. Vilsack, No. 08-1546 (D.D.C., decided July 23, 2009). Dubbed in the press as the “mark of the beast” lawsuit, the complaint, brought by farmers “who raise livestock in a sustainable manner,” contends that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) coerced Michigan’s Department of Agriculture to adopt uniform NAIS requirements that threaten their way of life by gathering information into a national database against their wills and in violation of their religious beliefs. Among the complainants are Amish farmers who apparently believe (i) they have been given dominion and control over animals, and that control has now been given to state and federal agencies; (ii) they are not permitted to take the NAIS…
The Cancer Project, a vegan advocacy group affiliated with the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), has reportedly filed a putative consumer fraud class action on behalf of three New Jersey residents that seeks to require cancer-risk labels on hot dogs and other processed meats. Filed July 22, 2009, in New Jersey Superior Court, the complaint names as defendants the parent companies of several hot dog manufacturers, including Kraft Foods Inc., Sara Lee Corp. and Nathan’s Famous Inc. The suit seeks damages for the named plaintiffs and declaratory relief under the Consumer Fraud Act for the proposed class. The Cancer Project has contended that processed meats contain human carcinogens like nitrites and N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), basing its claim on a recent meta-analysis by the American Institute for Cancer Research that purportedly associates the daily consumption of processed meat with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. “Just as tobacco causes lung cancer,…
