On June 26th, R-CALF USA held a press conference demanding Tyson Meats back off demands of court costs from Herman Schumacher, a South Dakota rancher. For story on the Oklahoma Farm Report, click here. Tyson Meats is demanding nearly $16,000 in court costs from Mr. Schumacher. According to the story,
[i]n response to R-CALF USA’s request that Tyson Fresh Meats (Tyson) immediately withdraw its judgment against South Dakota rancher and cattle feeder Herman Schumacher, as well as withdraw its legal action to seize Schumacher’s home, Tyson Foods Executive Vice President-Corporate Affairs Archie Schaffer informed R-CALF USA on Monday afternoon that Tyson intends to donate the proceeds extracted from Schumacher to local food banks in South Dakota.The problem arises because a federal jury found Tyson and other packers had violated the Packers and Stockyards Act.
The jury awarded Schumacher and the other cattle producers harmed by the meatpackers $9.25 million dollars. The jury’s verdict, however, was overturned on appeal on a technicality. The appellate court ruled it was not enough to prove that packers engaged in unlawful conduct. It ruled that in order to prove a violation of the PSA, “a plaintiff must show that a packer intentionally committed unlawful conduct.The Eighth Circuit allowed the packers to keep the $9.25 million, and allowed the packers to go back to the federal district court and request court costs. Tyson did this, and
[a]s a result of Tyson’s actions, the U.S. Marshals Service posted official “No Trespassing” and “Warning” signs on Schumacher’s home, requiring him to pay nearly $16,000 to Tyson or his home will be sold.
To view more on this story on R-CALF’s website, click here.
Updated: Tyson Foods recently responded to R-CALF's allegations. According Tyson spokesman Gary Mickelson,
"the 8th Circuit Appeals Court ruled Tyson was entitled to compensation and that payment in now overdue. However, Tyson indicates that they are not trying to take the cattleman's home. Instead, they have said in a letter to Schumacher that ""Although Tyson has never heard from your or your attorneys on this matter, we have been informed by the Marshall's office that you intend to pay the amount by July 1, 2009. This would be a very positive development. However, if this creates difficulties for you, we are willing to discuss a reasonable resolution for payment. In any event, Tyson hopes the other plaintiffs and any associations that encouraged you to file this litigation in your home state will help you pay for their fair share of the court-amount."To view this story on the Oklahoma Farm Report, click here.
To view the Eighth Circuit’s opinion in Schumacher v. Cargill Meat Solutions, 515 F.3d 867 (8th Cir. 2008), click here.
To a view summary of the federal district court’s opinion upholding the jury’s verdict, click here. This decision is reported at Schumacher v. Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc., 447 F.Supp.2d 1078 (D.S.D. 2006).
For more Packers and Stockyard Act cases, click here to view the Center’s Packers and Stockyards Act Case Law Index.
Posted: 06/30/09
Updated: 07/01/09