There’re a lot of people shaking their heads, worried about a jury verdict in Raleigh. Ten neighbors filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging the hog farm – one hog farm – near them was a nuisance. And a jury awarded them $50 million. $5 million each. So, now, across eastern North Carolina people are wondering, How many farmers could survive a verdict of $100,000 or $500,000 – much less $50 million? They’d go bankrupt.Now granted, this verdict wasn’t against the farmer who owned the farm. It was against Smithfield Foods. But if a Raleigh jury will award 10 plaintiffs $5 million each, could lawyers begin suing individual farmers next?Granted too, the $50 million verdict may be reduced. Because it violates the state law that limits punitive damages in these types of lawsuits. In fact, the Raleigh jury awarded fifteen times more than the state limit. But with millions of dollars at stake could the lawyers start looking for a way around the limit?It’s also true that, last year, the state passed another law that protects farmers from lawyers who bring these types of lawsuits. That law didn’t affect this case – and it won’t affect the other 9 cases the same lawyers have brought – because they were filed before the new law was passed. But, theoretically, the new law would protect farmers in the future from verdicts like this. But could the lawyers start looking for a way around that law too?The next trial – the second of the 10 original cases – starts on May 29th. The lawyers brought this case first because it was their best case. So history may not repeat itself. Next time the lawyers suing Smithfield Foods may lose. But what if there are more verdicts like this one? How many hog farmers could be put out of business? And what would that do to North Carolina’s economy?In North Carolina, the foundation of hog farming is a partnership between local farmers and companies like Smithfield Foods. A drought that hurts one, hurts the other. And a $50 million-dollar verdict that hurts one, hurts both. So a lot of farmers are wondering whether a lawyer from Texas, in one trial in a federal courtroom in Raleigh, turned their lives upside down. And they’re asking themselves, How does this end?The answer to that question matters to the lives of thousands of farmers. And the wrong answer could fracture a pillar of North Carolina’s economy. But getting the answers may take a while. The next trial begins on May 29th.
Smithfield Foods to Appeal Nuisance Lawsuit Verdict
in News Article
A statement was released by Smithfield Foods regarding the recent verdict of the nuisance lawsuits. It is as follows:
Smithfield Foods Statement Regarding North Carolina Verdict
We are extremely disappointed by the verdict. We will appeal to the Fourth Circuit, and we are confident we will prevail. We believe the outcome would have been different if the court had allowed the jury to (1) visit the plaintiffs’ properties and the Kinlaw farm and (2) hear additional vital evidence, especially the results of our expert’s odor-monitoring tests.These lawsuits are an outrageous attack on animal agriculture, rural North Carolina and thousands of independent family farmers who own and operate contract farms. These farmers are apparently not safe from attack even if they fully comply with all federal, state and local laws and regulations. The lawsuits are a serious threat to a major industry, to North Carolina’s entire economy and to the jobs and livelihoods of tens of thousands of North Carolinians.From the beginning, the lawsuits have been nothing more than a money grab by a big litigation machine. Plaintiffs’ original lawyers promised potential plaintiffs a big payday. Those lawyers were condemned by a North Carolina state court for unethical practices. Plaintiffs’ counsel at trial relied heavily on anti-agriculture, anti-corporate rhetoric rather than the real facts in the case. These practices are abuses of our legal system, and we will continue to fight them.—Statement by Keira Lombardo, Senior Vice President of Corporate Affairs, Smithfield Foods, Inc.
Nuisance Lawsuits Against Hog Farms Begin: Opening Arguments Recap
The first in a series of nuisance lawsuits against Murphy-Brown went to court this week in Raleigh. The opening arguments provided an outline of each side’s case. Here’s a recap:
Attorneys for the plaintiffs made an emotional appeal in their opening argument, portraying their clients as sympathetic victims who suffer from unbearable odor created by the nearby hog farm. Attorneys explained how North Carolina hog farming has changed since the 1980s, with a move toward large commercial farms that prevent neighbors from enjoying their property. They placed the blame squarely on Murphy-Brown, saying they control the operations of local growers and are well aware of the nuisances they create.
At times, the rhetoric was over the top. “We can’t bring hog odor into the courtroom. I wish we could. But we’d never get it out. It’s that bad."
The defense took a more reasoned, scientific approach and reminded jurors that this case is about the conditions at a single farm: Kinlaw Farm in Bladen County. It is not about what happened in the ‘80s or ‘90s and is not about hog farms in general. The attorneys emphasized that the Kinlaw Farm has never had any issues — no complaints, no violations, no concerns raised. They stressed that the farmer enjoyed good relationships with his neighbors until out-of-state lawyers showed up.
The attorneys also highlighted the growth that has occurred around the Kinlaw Farm since it began operations, including the construction of a world-class horse farm, a vacation property popular with those who love the outdoors, and several new houses where young families now live. “Actions speak volumes,” the attorney told jurors.