Peanut Butter Plant Inspection:
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
The big news, this round, was the Sylvester, Georgia plant inspection which took place in earnest on April 13, 2007. The inspection took a solid 7 hours, during which time we were not permitted by ConAgra’s lawyers to eat or even drink water. This, combined with the serious concentration on this task, made for a particularly grueling day.
In any event, note that Mr. Orlando and Mr. Karnas were forced to sign a very detailed confidentiality Order which ConAgra had petitioned for in Court. In light of this Order, we decline to disclose publicly on this site any air and machine testing results, photographs, biological swabbing test results, video evidence and extended discussions on what was discovered. Suffice it to say that although we have been on numerous food plant inspections in our time (that is, we’re “realistic”), this plant was dirty. While we formed honest opinions that ConAgra may be a decent company, that the Sylvester plant apparently is manned with decent, hard working people (we met several), and that Peter Pan is a strong brand that will survive into the future, the plant had become dirty. There were positive signs that the plant will retool and modernize in the future - but this still leaves for us to deal with the past, that is, our ongoing adulteration and consumer claims. People were hurt, and a remedy for those folks remains the task at hand.
MULTI DISTRICT LITIGATION PANEL HEARING:
The Multi-District Litigation (“MDL”) Panel, headquartered in Washington, D.C., has set a hearing for placement of the MDL case for Thursday, May 31, 2007 at the Federal District Courthouse in Las Vegas, Nevada.
At this hearing, oral argument will be heard from various groups as to what jurisdiction and venue would best be suited for placement of the entire federal class action lawsuit - that is, all cases nationwide, combined. While the Northern District of Georgia remains, in our opinion, a front runner in consideration, the Rome Division (rather than the Atlanta Division) appears to have gained a majority interest in groups responding to the MDL Petition. While your group supported the Atlanta Division, we would be equally as happy before Judge Harold Murphy in the Rome Division. Our primary concern remains that justice for our clients and those others injured be done. Judge Murphy is as competent to meet this goal (fairness to all parties) as is Judge Clarence Cooper to whom our lawsuit was assigned originally.
Two other law groups handling peanut butter litigation are sponsoring a meeting at the Bellagio Hotel the evening before the MDL Panel hearing. Your lawyers will be there.
[As a side note, “yes,” your attorneys do plan, at their own expense, to take in a show or two! While a group of federal judges chose the location for this hearing, we lodged no objection...]
ON-GOING PEANUT BUTTER SAMPLE TESTING:
Our rate of positive test results of random and serious injury or death
samples remains high, at a 27% success rate. As far as an informal polling
shows, we remain the firm with the highest positive rate thus far, in
large
part due to the testing protocol developed by your lawyers and our expert
epidemiologist. In addition to this, we are beginning to see a pattern
emerge as to a time frame where 100% of our positive test results have
been
found. Note that this may be coincidental and is non-scientific at this
point. Nonetheless, we are working with counsel for ConAgra to see if
we
can match this pattern to some of its retained product from the recall
in
order to better identify that product line which allegedly poses the
greatest risk of illness. A pattern may also help us identify those client
samples most likely to demonstrate positive contamination test results.
As in all prior postings, we warn our clients or others reading this update that a negative finding for salmonella contamination does not mean that your particular jar was not adulterated. It simply may mean that the portion of the jar containing potential salmonella infection had been consumed or that sample contaminants were too dispersed or minuscule to be found.
OUR CLIENT GROUP GROWS:
Early on, a number of lawyers issued warnings to prospective clients to steer clear of class action lawsuits in order to attempt to lure clients into their fold, promising some type of individualized attention that, they allege, would be lacking in a class action lawsuit. It is interesting to note that these lawyers now have joined one of the various larger, class action based litigation groups in various respects. We, on the other hand, have remained constant, steadfast toward the goal of justice for our clients, and have provided individualized attention to our loyal clients that our two decades experience leads us to provide. (Mr. Orlando still personally responds to each client email he receives.)
As a result, we welcome the referral of clients from two other law firms who recognize our work product, strong experience and dedication to this cause.
Thank you.
Meet Mr. Orlando
Current News
Read the Lawsuit
Quick Contact
Time is of the essence in these very sensitive cases. Simply use the form below and an Attorney will contact you shortly.
Free Case Evaluation
Find out quickly - with no cost or obligation - if you might be entitled to a large cash settlement. Simply complete the Case Evaluation Form.
