On Eve of Super Bowl, Food Distributors Declare War on Chicken Wing Producers
US Foods and Sysco sued major chicken producers in federal court in Illinois on Tuesday.
January 31, 2018 at 03:28 PM
3 minute read
As football fans across the country purchase millions of chicken wings ahead of Sunday's big game, two major food producers are claiming poultry prices are illegally fixed.
US Foods Inc. and Sysco Corp. each filed an antitrust lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on Tuesday against more than two dozen poultry companies. The distributors allege the companies, including Tyson Foods, Pilgrim's Pride, Sanderson Farms and Perdue Farms, have engaged in an illegal scheme to keep chicken prices high since as early as 2008 through at least 2016.
“By their wrongful conduct as alleged in this complaint, defendants not only materially reduced or eliminated the historical boom and bust cycle of the chicken industry, they propped up chicken prices during periods of rapidly falling input costs by, among other means, coordinating supply restrictions and manipulating one or more broiler price indices,” the complaints said.
US Foods and Sysco are represented by veteran commercial litigation partners Scott Gant and Jonathan Shaw of Boies Schiller Flexner's Washington, D.C., office, and associate Kyle Smith. Just a few months ago, Gant argued before the Supreme Court in Patchak v. Zinke, representing a property owner in a separation of powers case.
As of Wednesday, the two cases appeared to be assigned to different judges. Judge Charles Norgle is currently in charge of US Foods' lawsuit, and Judge Elaine Bucklo will oversee Sysco's.
Tuesday's complaints follow a series of legal wrinkles chicken producers have faced in the past few years. Fieldale Farms, one of the defendants, reached a $2.25 million settlement in a similar class action lawsuit last summer. Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi is also investigating chicken producers, including defendants in the distributors' lawsuits.
Spokespeople for Tyson's and Pilgrim's Pride said the claims are meritless, and that the companies look forward to defending their positions in court. A Perdue spokeswoman said the company does not comment on pending litigation, and a spokesperson for Sanderson Farms could not be reached for comment.
“Follow-on complaints like these are common in antitrust litigation,” said Tyson spokesman Gary Mickelson. “Such complaints do not change our position that the claims are unfounded. We will continue to vigorously defend our company.”
The lawsuits claim the poultry companies used two “mechanisms” to implement their scheme. First, the complaints say the companies collusively reduced their “breeder flocks,” purposely diminishing their ability to increase supply when prices increased.
The lawsuit also claims the companies manipulated the “Georgia Dock,” a benchmark price compiled by the Georgia Department of Agriculture based on self-reported numbers. The GDA suspended use of the Georgia Dock in late 2016 amid scrutiny from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and media reports.
The reduction scheme, the suit claims, was aided by Agri Stats Inc., an industry information company owned by Eli Lilly & Co. Though Agri Stats reports poultry producer information anonymously, the lawsuit claims it provided extremely detailed information that allowed producers to discern each others' identities.
Agri Stats is also a defendant in the lawsuit. A company spokesman did not immediately return a request for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readFederal Judge Grants FTC Motion Blocking Proposed Kroger-Albertsons Merger
3 minute readFrozen-Potato Producers Face Profiteering Allegations in Surge of Antitrust Class Actions
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Revisiting the Boundaries Between Proper and Improper Argument: 10 Years Later
- 2Hochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
- 3Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
- 4Biden commutes sentences for 37 of 40 federal death row inmates, including two convicted of California murders
- 5Avoiding Franchisor Failures: Be Cautious and Do Your Research
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250