Legal Opinion

Adams v. Pilgrim's Pride Corp.

District Court, E.D. Texas

Decided April 22, 2016No. Case No. 2:09-CV-397-RSPPublished

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM RULING

ROY S. PAYNE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Currently before'the Court is the Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 159) filed by Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation on April 15, 2011. The Motion comes back before the Court to consider the effect of the August 27, 2013 decision of the Court of Appeals (the Agerton decision) reversing the Judgment rendered in favor of some of the Plaintiffs (“the El Dorado growers”) on September 30, 2011. For the reasons expressed below, the Court finds that the Agerton decision applies with equal force to the claims of all of the Plaintiffs.

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Cheramie Services, Inc. v. Shell Deepwater Production, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 2010
  2. Leon J. Turner, D/B/A Lee's Creek Farm and Ranch v. Purina Mills, Inc., and Dan Robichaux, Purina Mills, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
  3. Orthopedic & Sports Injury Clinic v. Wang Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1991
  4. Cargill, Inc. v. Degesch America, Inc.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2012
  5. Nola Fine Art, Inc. v. Ducks Unlimited, Inc.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2015

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API