Case Law Index Commodity Programs
January 1, 1985 – August 31, 2024
This index provides a comprehensive – though not necessarily exhaustive – compilation of reported and unreported federal and state court decisions involving commodity programs that were decided and published between the dates listed above. The cases are listed in reverse chronological order. The “Text” link goes to the freely available Google Scholar text of the opinion, if applicable. This compilation is for educational purposes only. It is not a substitute for legal counsel.
SECOND CIRCUIT
United States v. Hansel, 70 F.3d 6 (2d Cir. 1995) (making false statements to CCC to obtain deficiency payments) Text
FOURTH CIRCUIT
Tyson v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 360 F. App’x 451 (4th Cir. 2010) (upholding USDA National Appeals Decision that tobacco grower had knowledge that error was made in Crop Disaster Payment calculation, requiring return of overpayment)
In re Peanut Crop Ins. Litigation, 524 F.3d 458 (4th Cir. 2008) (peanut insurance under the “Multiple Peril Crop Insurance Policy” of the 2002 Farm Bill) Text
Tyson v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 589 F.Supp.2d 584 (E.D. N.C. 2008) (denial of Crop Disaster Program for tobacco) Text
Neese v. Johanns, 518 F.3d 215 (4th Cir. 2008) (lack of standing to challenge tobacco program) Text
Holly Hill Farm Corp. v. United States, 447 F.3d 258 (4th Cir. 2006) (denial of farm program benefits) Text
Neese v. Johanns, No. Civ.A.1:05CV00071, 2006 WL 1169800 (W.D. Va. May 2, 2006) (class certification to challenge Tobacco Buyout Statute)
In re Evans, 337 B.R. 551 (Bankr. E.D. N.C. 2005) (debtors’ rights in tobacco transition payments) Text
McDaniels v. United States, 300 F.3d 407 (4th Cir. 2002) (denial of disaster relief) Text
Gold Dollar Warehouse, Inc. v. Glickman, 211 F.3d 93 (4th Cir. 2000) (challenging the assessment of tobacco marketing quota penalties by USDA) Text
Bryant v. Sec’y, U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 227 B.R. 89 (W.D. Va. 1998) (challenging FSA’s decision not to service the farm loan) Text
In re Britton, 83 B.R. 914 (Bankr. E.D. N.C. 1988) (setoff of price support payments) Text
Strickland v. Flue-Cured Tobacco Co-op. Stabilization Corp., 643 F. Supp. 310 (D.S.C. 1986) (challenging rebate program under the No Net Cost Tobacco Program Act) Text
United States v. Carolina E. Chem. Co., Inc., 638 F. Supp. 521 (D. S.C. 1986) (whether PIK entitlements were “proceeds” of crop collateral) Text
FIFTH CIRCUIT
In re Morris, 616 B.R. 499 (Bankr. N.D. Miss. 2020) (considering the PLC program’s offset provision of payments for debts owed to agencies of the U.S. government) Text
Adkins v. Silverman, 899 F.3d 395 (5th Cir. 2018) (concluding that it was permissible for farmers to exclude historical data that the FCIC had not yet calculated in determining crop insurance calculations) Text
Adkins v. Vilsack, 252 F.Supp.3d 588 (N.D. Tex. 2017) (considering whether farm bill’s APH Yield exclusion was incorrectly denied application by FCIC administrator) Text
Regions Bank v. Mills, No. 06-0565, 2006 WL 2193202 (W.D. La. Aug. 1, 2006) (post-bankruptcy petition liens in program payments) Text
Kinder Canal Co. v. Johanns, No. 05-1123, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5514, 2006 WL 250485 (W.D. La. Jan. 31, 2006), aff’d, 493 F.3d 543 (5th Cir. 2007) (misrepresentation of program eligibility, refund program payments)
In re Burgess, 438 F.3d 493 (5th Cir. 2006) (post-petition disaster payments not part of the bankruptcy estate) Text
United States v. Wheeler, 79 F. App’x 656 (5th Cir. 2003) (materially false statements)
Brown v.U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 67 F. App’x 241, 2003 WL 21108492 (5th Cir. 2003) (denial of disaster assistance)
Gore v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 65 F. App’x 509, 2003 WL 1922990 (5th Cir. 2003) (review of denial of crop disaster assistance)
Belgard v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 324 F.3d 328 (5th Cir. 2003) (reduction of disaster assistance) Text
In re Gibson, 308 B.R. 763 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2002) (setoff of LDP payments) Text
Belgard, Jimmie Belgard v. U.S. Dep’t of Agr., 185 F. Supp. 2d 647 (W.D. La. 2001) (reduction of disaster assistance) Text
Bass v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 211 F.3d 959 (5th Cir. 2000) (FSA’s “leaseback/buyback” program, challenging repurchase price) Text
In re Cook, 169 F.3d 271 (5th Cir. 1999) (liens on crop insurance proceeds) Text
Winters Ranch P’ship v. Viadero, 123 F.3d 327 (5th Cir. 1997) (challenging USDA’s authority in conducting audit) Text
Cottonport Bank v. Dichiara, 193 B.R. 798, 803 (W.D. La. 1996) (bankruptcy, agricultural price support classified as farm income) Text
Hayre v. Glickman, 71 F.3d 875 (5th Cir. 1995) (seeking preliminary injunction to enjoin price support payment withholding)
Winters Ranch P’ship v. Viadero, 901 F. Supp. 237 (W.D. Tex. 1995) (challenging USDA’s authority in conducting audit) Text
DCP Farms v. Espy, CIV. 294CV85BA, 1995 WL 1945518 (N.D. Miss. Feb. 10, 1995) (seeking judicial review of USDA’s action denying federal farm program benefits)
Chiodo v. Espy, 42 F.3d 641 (5th Cir. 1994) (peanut quota; false identification of peanuts)
DCP Farms v. Yeutter, 957 F.2d 1183 (5th Cir. 1992) (denial of subsidy payments) Text
DCP Farms v. Yeutter, 761 F. Supp. 1269 (N.D. Miss. 1991) (eligibility to participate in farm commodity program) Text
In re Ferguson, 112 B.R. 820 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1990) (holding that CCC regulations do not pre-empt state commercial laws) Text
Matter of Great W. Sugar Co., 902 F.2d 351 (5th Cir. 1990) (security interest arisen in connection with price support program) Text
In re Jones, 107 B.R. 888 (Bankr. N.D. Miss. 1989) (seeking to recover pecan disaster payments from CCC) Text
In re Thomas, 91 B.R. 731 (N.D. Tex. 1988) (set-off of disaster payments against debts) Text
In re Fryar, 93 B.R. 101 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 1988) (set-off of commodity certificates) Text
Caldwell Sugars Co-op., Inc. v. United States, 692 F. Supp. 659 (E.D. La. 1988) (price support program, taxation) Text
In re Stephenson, 155 B.R. 952 (N.D. Tex. 1988) (set-off of crop disaster payments) Text
In re Thomas, 84 B.R. 438, 438 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1988) (set-off of disaster payments against debts) Text
In re Stephenson, 84 B.R. 74 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1988) (setoff of crop disaster payments) Text
In re Parrish, 75 B.R. 14 (N.D. Tex. 1987) (setoff of price support payments) Text
In re Hawkins, 58 B.R. 18, 18 (Bankr. N.D. Miss. 1985) (authority to enter into a price support loan with the CCC) Text
United States v. Medlin, 767 F.2d 1104 (5th Cir. 1985) (action to recover overpayments of cotton subsidies) Text
United States v. O’Neil, 767 F.2d 1111 (5th Cir. 1985) (action to recover overpayments of cotton subsidies) Text
SIXTH CIRCUIT
Cardinal Land Conservancy, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46357 (S.D. Ohio March 16, 2022) (denied request for NRCS to fund the plaintiffs easement grant under the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program) Text
Maple Drive Farms Ltd. v. Vilsack, 781 F.3d 837 (6th Cir. 2015) (assessing USDA interpretation of “prior converted wetland” and holding that NCRS’ failure to consider farmer’s minimal evidence was arbitrary) Text
Durbin v. Farm Serv. Agency, No. C2:05-CV-566, 2007 WL 1114986 (S.D. Ohio April 13, 2007) (denial of farm program benefits) Text
Fullenkamp v. Veneman, 383 F.3d 478 (6th Cir. 2004) (dairy program upheld) Text
Klingenfus v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., CIV.A. 3:00CV-282-H, 2001 WL 1772025 (W.D. Ky. Aug. 1, 2001) (plaintiff’s failure to timely execute a succession-in-interest PFC)
United States v. Martin, 95 F.3d 406 (6th Cir. 1996) (over-quota tobacco marketing) Text
United States v. Williams, 993 F.2d 1224 (6th Cir. 1993) (embezzling and misapplying disaster and feed grain program funds) Text
In re Julien Co., 117 B.R. 910 (Bankr. W.D. Tenn. 1990) (security for a CCC price support loan) Text
Perkins v. United States, CIV.A. 86-93, 1987 WL 32326 (E.D. Ky. Dec. 23, 1987) (seeking to withdraw the bid for participation in the DTP)
FMB-First Michigan Bank v. Van Rhee, 681 F. Supp. 1264 (W.D. Mich. 1987) (perfected security interest in DTP payments) Text
In re Shepherd, 75 B.R. 501 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1987) (whether farm program payments were “farm income”) Text
Haupricht Bros., Inc. v. Sec’y of Agric., CIV.A. 84CV-7405-AA, 1985 WL 130 (E.D. Mich. May 6, 1985) (eligiblity to participate in PIK program)
Robinson v. Block, 608 F. Supp. 817 (W.D. Mich. 1985) (alleged breach of PIK contract) Text
SEVENTH CIRCUIT
Boucher v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 934 F.3d 530 (7th Cir. 2019) (producer denied eligibility of farm program benefits where portions of property were deemed converted wetlands) Text
In re Blake, No. 16–60425, 2018 WL 1182178 (S.D. Ill. Mar. 6, 2018) (ARC payments were not insulated from Chapter 12 bankruptcy creditor’s claims)
United States v. Diekemper, 604 F.3d 345 (Seventh Circuit 2010) (making false statements to the CCC) Text
Bedeker v. United States, Nos. 07 C 6 014, 08 C 1711, 2009 WL 691288 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 16, 2009)(violation of Swampbuster) Text
Five Points Road Joint Venture v. Johanns, 542 F.3d 1121 (7th Cir. 2008) (fees and costs where claimant prevailed in reversing order requiring refund of farm program benefits)
Horn Farms v. Johanns, 397 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 2005) (denial of subsidy payments) Text
Lamers Dairy Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 379 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 2004) Text
Alto Dairy v. Veneman, 336 F.3d 560 (7th 2003) (milk marketing order) Text
Israel v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 135 F. Supp. 2d 945 (W.D. Wis. 2001) (challenging the enforcement of appreciation agreement) Text
Green v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., IP 00-0579-C H/G, 2000 WL 682657 (S.D. Ind. May 5, 2000) (motion for injunction from the cross-county lease and transfer of burley tobacco quotas)
United States v. Dierckman, 201 F.3d 915 (7th Cir. 2000) (action against farmer to recover overpayment of crop subsidies) Text
In re Klaus, 247 B.R. 761 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 2000) (security interest in loan deficiency payments) Text
In re Norville, 248 B.R. 127 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 2000) (security interest in government disaster check) Text
In re Otto Farms, Inc., 247 B.R. 757 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 2000) (security interest in loan deficiency payments) Text
In re Klaus, 247 B.R. 761 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 2000) (security interest in loan deficiency payments) Text
United States v. Dierckman, 41 F. Supp. 2d 870 (S.D. Ind. 1998) (action against farmer to recover overpayment of crop subsidies) Text
United States v. Drake, 934 F. Supp. 953 (N.D. Ill. 1996) (imposition by ASCS of suspension on price support loans from CCC to defendant) Text
Gorden v. Kreul, 77 F.3d 152 (7th Cir. 1996) (challenging the act of seizure of collateral as unconstirutional) Text
Doane v. Espy, 873 F. Supp. 1277 (W.D. Wis. 1995) (eligibility under the Disaster Assistance Act) Text
Hanson v. Espy, 8 F.3d 469 (7th Cir. 1993) (denial of disaster assistance payments) Text
Nickels v. Espy, 92 C 3766, 1993 WL 265468 (N.D. Ill. July 13, 1993) (denial of forgiveness of price support loan)
Hanson v. Madigan, 788 F. Supp. 403 (W.D. Wis. 1992) (denial of disaster assistance payments) Text
In re Blackert, 109 B.R. 857 (C.D. Ill. 1990) (whether the Feed Grain Program payments were subject to interest) Text
In re Ladd, 106 B.R. 174 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 1989) (whether the disaster payments were proceeds of crops) Text
In re Lane, 96 B.R. 164 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 1988) (whether the debtors assumed the Feed Grain contracts) Text
In re Winterroth, 97 B.R. 454 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 1988) (security interest in PIK certificates) Text
Matter of Lundell Farms, 86 B.R. 582 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 1988) (motion for turnover of the farm program payments) Text
In re George, 78 B.R. 886 (C.D. Ill. 1987) (security interest in government program payments) Text
In re Kruger, 78 B.R. 538 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 1987) (whether government deficiency payments were “proceeds”) Text
In re Settles, 69 B.R. 634 (Bankr, C.D. Ill. 1987) (participating in price support programs with substitute crops) Text
In re Cordes, 65 B.R. 678 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1986) (security interest in PIK payments) Text
In re Earley, 65 B.R. 658 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 1986) (reverse cash collateral motion) Text
In re Weyland, 63 B.R. 854 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 1986) (security interest in farm program payments) Text
In re George, 62 B.R. 671 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 1986) (security interest in government program payments) Text
In re Kotter, 58 B.R. 118 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 1986) (“on-farm storage” program; discrimination) Text
Matter of Schmaling, 783 F.2d 680 (7th Cir. 1986) (whether PIK payments were “proceeds” under UCC) Text
J. Catton Farms, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank of Chicago, 779 F.2d 1242 (7th Cir. 1985) (security interest in proceeds of payment in kind contract) Text
Gibson v. Block, 619 F. Supp. 1572 (N.D. Ind. 1985) (denial of PIK grain and PIK cash payments) Text
EIGHTH CIRCUIT
Epp v. Natural Resources Conservation Service, 425 F.Supp.3d 1142 (D. Neb. 2019) (wetland determinations and program benefit eligibility) Text
In re Gapp, 604 B.R. 371 (Bankr. D. N.D. 2019) (omission of PLC payments from bankruptcy petition) Text
Morehouse v. Comm’r, 769 F.3d 616 (8th Cir. 2014) (“actively engaged in farming” classification for purposes of farm bill program eligibility does not extend to self-employment for tax purposes) Text
Peterson v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., No. 3:13–cv–34, 2014 WL 4809398 (D.N.D. Sep. 26, 2014) (violation of Swampbuster and eligibility for farm program benefits)
Bartlett v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 716 F.3d 464 (8th Cir. 2013) (failure to exhaust administrative remedies regarding challenge to price election figure used by FSA in calculating Supplemental Revenue Assistance Payments Program (SURE Program) payments under 2008 farm bill) Text
Central Platte Nat. Res. Dist. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 4:09CV3198, 2010 WL 11545694 (D. Neb. Sep. 28, 2010) (plaintiff not entitled to geospatial data under 2008 farm bill and Freedom of Information act (FOIA))
U.S. v. Rice, 605 F.3d 473 (8th Cir. 2010) (making materially false statements on USDA loan application) Text
B&S Farms of Kasson, LLC v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., No. 08-CV-5827 PJS/JJK, 2009 WL 2998551 (D. Minn. Sept. 15, 2009) (what is “significant contribution of active management”) Text
Arnegard v. Feilmeier, No. 4:08–CV–083, 2009 WL 2590536 (D.N.D. Aug. 19, 2009) (violation of marketing assistance loan program terms)
B&D Land & Livestock Co. v. Schafer, 615 F.Supp.2d 950 (N.D. Iowa 2009) (awarding attorney’s fees under EAJA; successful challenge of wetlands determination) Text
Clark v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 537 F.3d 934 (8th Cir. 2008) (program ineligibility because of wetlands conversion) Text
Anderson v. Farm Serv. Agency of U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 534 F.3d 811 (8th Cir. 2008) (denial of crop disaster assistance payments) Text
B & D Land & Livestock Co. v. Conner, 534 F.Supp.2d 891 (N.D. Iowa 2008) (granting preliminary injunction from denying farm program benefits) Text
In re Walterman Implement, Inc., 49 Bankr.Ct.Dec. 53, 2007 WL 4224041 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa Nov. 27, 2007) (avoidance of refund of Direct Payment to FSA)
In re Holliday, Nos. 05-30051, 03-00947, 2007 WL 2298650 (Bankr. S.D. Iowa Aug. 7, 2007) (eligibility status, scheme or device to receive more benefits)
Anderson v. Farm Serv. Agency, 502 F.Supp.2d 924 (D. Minn. 2007) (disaster payment rate) Text
Barger v. Johanns, No. 4:04CV3268, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14331, 2006 WL 680889 (D. Neb. March 13, 2006) (farm program eligibility)
Clason v. Johanns, 438 F.3d 868 (8th Cir. 2006) (repayment of marketing assistance loan) Text
Mages v. Johanns, 431 F.3d 1132 (8th Cir. 2005) (“separate person”, scheme to evade farm program requirements) Text
Mitchell v. Johanns, 400 F.Supp.2d 1133 (S.D. Iowa 2005) (joint and severally liability for program benefits) Text
N. Plains Dairy, LLP v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., No. Civ.04-4922, 2005 WL 2778757, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25567 (D. Minn. Oct. 25, 2005) (milk support payments)
Siebrasse v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 418 F.3d 847 (8th Cir. 2005) (transfer from PFC to CRP) Text
Rosenau v. Farm Serv. Agency, 395 F.Supp.2d 868 (D. N.D. 2005) (exemption to Swampbuster) Text
U.S. v. Huber, 404 F.3d 1047 (8th Cir. 2005) (payment limitations violation) Text
In re Stevens, 307 B.R. 124 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2004) (perfected security interest in farm program payments) Text
In re Wilson, 305 B.R. 4 (N.D. Iowa 2004) (farm program payments in bankruptcy context) Text
In re Vote, 276 F.3d 1024 (8th Cir. 2002) (treatment of post-bankruptcy petition disaster payments) Text
In re Vote, 261 B.R. 439 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 2001) (whether government payments were included in “property of the estate”) Text
In re Vote, 99-31487, 2000 WL 33792714 (Bankr. D.N.D. Nov. 6, 2000) (whether federal agricultural assistance program payments were part of the bankruptcy estate)
Branstad v. Glickman, 118 F. Supp. 2d 925 (N.D. Iowa 2000) (motion to enjoin USDA from withholding federal farm program benefits) Text
In re Burke, 251 B.R. 720 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2000) (bankruptcy: right to an exemption under crop disaster assistance program) Text
Ag Acceptance Corp. v. Nelson, 103 F. Supp. 2d 1129 (D. Minn. 2000) (motion to prevent borrowers from disposing of their crop loss disaster payments) Text
Harrod v. Glickman, 206 F.3d 783 (8th Cir. 2000) (challenging the decision of USDA requiring farmers to reimburse disaster relief payments) Text
In re Lesmeister, 242 B.R. 920 (Bankr. D.N.D. 1999) (security interest in crop loss benefits) Text
In re Sauer, 223 B.R. 715 (Bankr. D.N.D. 1998) (whether debtors’ anticipated PFC and CRP payments were subject to FSA’s right of setoff) Text
In re Endicott, 239 B.R. 529 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 1999) (perfected security interest in CLDAP program payments) Text
Minnesota Milk Producers Ass’n v. Glickman, 153 F.3d 632 (8th Cir. 1998) (challenging various aspects of federal milk pricing program) Text
Petzoldt v. Glickman, 983 F. Supp. 873 (E.D. Mo. 1997) (whether aquaculture crop was ineligible for crop insurance through FCIC) Text
Gunn v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 118 F.3d 1233 (8th Cir. 1997) (Swampbuster law; eligibility for certain farm benefit programs) Text
Downer v. U.S. By & Through U.S. Dep’t of Agric. & Soil Conservation Serv., 97 F.3d 999 (8th Cir. 1996) (seeking judicial review of USDA’s action depriving farmer of crop subsidies) Text
Von Eye v. United States, 92 F.3d 681 (8th Cir. 1996) (wetland commenced conversion exemption from Swampbuster law) Text
Huntsman Farms, Inc. v. Espy, 928 F. Supp. 1451 (E.D. Ark. 1996) (seeking judicial review of ASCS’ decisions under payment limitation regulations) Text
Downer v. U.S. By & Through U.S. Dep’t of Agric. & Soil Conservation Serv., 894 F. Supp. 1348 (D.S.D. 1995) (seeking judicial review of USDA’s action depriving farmer of crop subsidies) Text
Minnesota Milk Producers Ass’n v. Yeutter, 851 F. Supp. 1389 (D. Minn. 1994) (milk marketing orders) Text
U.S. Through Agric. Stabilization & Conservation Serv. v. Gerth, 991 F.2d 1428 (8th Cir. 1993) (set-off of Conservation Reserve Program payments) Text
In re Allen, 135 B.R. 856 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa 1992) (set off debtor’s price support loan) Text
In re Lund, 136 B.R. 237 (Bankr. D. N.D., Dec. 3, 1990) (challenging a debtor’s plan to reorganize its farm in exchange for price support deficiency payments as violating the CCC’s right to setoff) Text
Cordes v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., CIV. 4-89-732, 1990 WL 182336 (D. Minn. Oct. 30, 1990) (challenging the disqualification from the Wheat and Feed Grain program)
In re Shuger, 87-2184-D H, 1990 WL 10593988 (Bankr. S.D. Iowa June 15, 1990) (whether PIK certificates were eligible as security)
In re Ness, 88-05773, 1990 WL 1239804 (Bankr. D. N.D. Feb. 23, 1990) (secured interest in farm program payments, CCC’s right of setoff)
Matter of Curry, 113 B.R. 546 (D. Neb. 1990) (whether PIK certificate was subject to security interest) Text
Small Bus. Admin. v. Rinehart, 887 F.2d 165 (8th Cir. 1989) (setoff of farm program payments) Text
In re Buxa, 86-05160, 1989 WL 1107885 (Bankr. D. N.D. July 18, 1989) (PCA’s security interest in government program payments)
In re Wilkin, 87-808-C H, 1989 WL 1684563 (Bankr. S.D. Iowa June 16, 1989) (superiority of interests in debtors’ farm program deficiency payments)
Matter of Butz, 154 B.R. 541 (S.D. Iowa 1989) (whether the FmHA has an interest in the farm program benefits) Text
In re Mehrhoff, CIV. 88-1488-A, 1989 WL 1681505 (S.D. Iowa Mar. 21, 1989) (setoff of ASCS-CCC farm program payments)
In re Kingsley, 865 F.2d 975 (8th Cir. 1989) (whether government deficiency payments were “proceeds”) Text
United States v. Johnson, 853 F.2d 619 (8th Cir. 1988) (alledged default on CCC price support loans) Text
In re Arnold, 88 B.R. 917 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa 1988) (perfected security interest in commodity certificate) Text
Matter of Mehrhoff, 88 B.R. 922 (Bankr. S.D. Iowa 1988) (setoff of ASCS-CCC farm program payments) Text
Matter of Butz, 86 B.R. 595 (Bankr. S.D. Iowa 1988) (whether the FmHA has an interest in the farm program benefits) Text
Matter of Hunerdosse, 85 B.R. 999 (Bankr. S.D. Iowa 1988) (security interest in deficiency payments) Text
In re Branderhorst, 843 F.2d 311 (8th Cir. 1988) (security interest in corn received under PIK program) Text
Lisbon Bank & Trust Co. v. Commodity Credit Corp., 679 F. Supp. 903 (N.D. Iowa 1987) (security interest in dairy termination program payments) Text
Matter of Mattice, 81 B.R. 504 (Bankr. S.D. Iowa 1987) (whether feed and grain program payments were “wages”) Text
Matter of Lehl, 79 B.R. 880 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1987) (security interest in commodity certificates) Text
Matter of Halls, 79 B.R. 417 (Bankr. S.D. Iowa 1987) (FDIC’s security interest in program payments) Text
In re Schnase, 87-05414, 1987 WL 857508 (Bankr. D. N.D. Oct. 21, 1987) (security interest in farm program payments)
Bank of Cresbard v. Lindhorst Farms, Inc., 78 B.R. 1002 (D. S.D. 1987) (whether farm program payments were “proceeds”) Text
Bank of N. Arkansas v. Owens, 76 B.R. 672 (E.D. Ark. 1987) (whether dairy termination program payments were “proceeds”) Text
In re Rinehart, 76 B.R. 746 (Bankr. D. S.D. 1987) (“administrative offset” of farm program payments) Text
In re Collins, 68 B.R. 242 (Bankr. D. Minn. 1986) (security interest in dairy termination program payments) Text
In re Bowling, 64 B.R. 710 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1986) (treatment of proceeds from dairy termination program) Text
United States v. Bisson, 646 F. Supp. 701 (D. S.D. 1986) (action to recover the balance due on CCC farm storage loan) Text
In re Rude, 83-04156, 1985 WL 17717 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa Oct. 25, 1985) (disbursement of proceeds received from the PIK program)
Statz v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., CIV 5-85-59, 1985 WL 111 (D. Minn. Oct. 9, 1985) (eligibility to participate in the Milk Diversion Program)
Westcott v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 765 F.2d 121 (8th Cir. 1985) (combining farms as one unit for PIK program purposes) Text
In re Mattick, 45 B.R. 615 (Bankr. D. Minn. 1985) (perfected security interest in the PIK entitlement) Text
NINTH CIRCUIT
Daniels Ranch, LLC v. Farm Serv. Agency, No. 1:22-CV-3099-TOR, 2023 WL 6133174, (E.D. Wash. Sept. 19, 2023) (upholding USDA decision not to recognize “pass through” entities for benefits attribution requirement of Coronavirus Food Relief Program) Text
Price Kane, LLC v. U.S. Dep’t Agric., No. 1:22-CV-3098-TOR, 2023 WL 6133429, (E.D. Wash. Sept. 18, 2023) (denying Coronavirus Food Relief Program payments because applicants failed to meet the legal entity attribution rule when there was no individual in the first four tiers of applicants’ ownership) Text
Tulelake Irrigation District v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 40 F.4th 930 (9th Cir. 2022) (holding the Fish and Wildlife service violated environmental laws when imposing restrictions on agricultural uses of land in southern Oregon and northern California) Text
Anderson v. Montana, 2022 Bankr. LEXIS 1550 (Bankr. D. Mont. 2022) (grazing lease payment was due and not altered under the state leases)
Clinger v. Farm Serv. Agency, No. CV 04 424 E BLW, 2006 WL 581192 (D. Idaho Mar. 8, 2006) (applying equitable estoppel to prohibit repayment of PIK payments)
McBride Cotton & Cattle Corp. v. Veneman, 296 F.Supp.2d 1125 (D. Ariz. 2003) (right of CCC to offset program benefits to pay delinquent USDA loans) Text
Beard v. Glickman, 189 F. Supp. 2d 994 (C.D. Cal. 2001) (USDA’s Conservation Reserve Program, challenging the denial of application) Text
McBride Cotton & Cattle Corp. v. Glickman, 99-0824-PHX-ROS, 2000 WL 34227966 (D. Ariz. Sept. 25, 2000) (administrative offsets of future payments from the various CCC farm programs)
In re Lemos, 243 B.R. 96 (Bankr. D. Idaho 1999) (CLDAP benefits constituted “proceeds” of debtor’s prebankruptcy crops) Text
Adams Farms v. Glickman, 152 F.3d 923 (9th Cir. 1998) (challenging the denial to provide price support payments)
United States v. B & M Farms, 87 F.3d 1323 (9th Cir. 1996) (federal program fraud)
State of Mont., Dep’t of State Lands v. Glickman, 85 F.3d 638 (9th Cir. 1996) (defining a “person” under the Food, Agriculture; Conservation and Trade Act of 1990)
Golightly v. Yeutter, 780 F. Supp. 672 (D. Ariz. 1991) (defining a “person” for federal farm subsidy purposes) Text
Sybrandy v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., Agric. Stabilization & Conservation Serv., 937 F.2d 443 (9th Cir. 1991) (alleged violation of milk production termination program) Text
Girard v. Klopfenstein, 930 F.2d 738 (9th Cir. 1991) (challenging proposed ASCS debarment proceedings) Text
In re Mohar, 140 B.R. 273 (Bankr. D. Mont. 1992) (setoff of government program payments) Text
Winchell v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 790 F. Supp. 214 (D. Mont. 1989) (termination of farmer’s participation in PIK program) Text
TENTH CIRCUIT
KLC Farm v. Perdue, 426 F.Supp.3d 837 (D. Kan 2019) (FSA’s calculation of actual average county yield and the average historical county yield for 2014 ARC-CO payments) Text
Ausmus v. Perdue, 908 F.3d 1248 (10th Cir. 2018) (effective date of APH yield exclusion) Text
Easterday Ranches, Inc. v. U.S. Dept. of Agric., 2010 WL 457432 (E.D. Wash. Feb. 5, 2010) (country of origin labeling (COOL) required by USDA rule implementing 2008 farm bill did not conflict with Treasury Department’s NAFTA rule)
In re Meyers, 362 F.3d 667 (10th Cir. 2004) (right to setoff program payments) Text
In re Klenke, Nos. 01-13501, 02-5026, 3004 WL 2192517 (Bankr. D. Kan. Feb 3, 2004) (MLAP payments post-bankruptcy petition)
Bishop v. Veneman, 283 F.Supp.2d 1207 (D. Kan. 2003) (reduction in PFC payments) Text
McKown v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 276 F.Supp.2d 1201 (D. N.M. 2003), aff’d, 97 F. App’x 283 (10th Cir. 2004) (PFC and MLAP payments) Text
In re Germann, 01-40059, 2001 WL 34652951 (Bankr. D. Kan. Nov. 1, 2001) (priority of security interests, Market Loss Assistance payments)
In re Shore Ltd., 99-40689, 2001 WL 34677398 (Bankr. D. Kan. June 4, 2001) (perfected security interest in government payments)
In re Isenbart, 255 B.R. 62 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2000) (security interest in CRP payments owing to debtor-farmers) Text
Lewis v. Glickman, 104 F. Supp. 2d 1311 (D. Kan. 2000) (offset of government payment to farmer against debt he owed to government) Text
Schmitz v. Callahan, 973 F. Supp. 1021 (D. Kan. 1997) (including agricultural commodity payments in offsetting retirement benefits) Text
Lyle v. Commodity Credit Corp., 104 F.3d 367 (10th Cir. 1996) (offset of the price support payment due to farmer’s tax liability)
In re Turner, 84 F.3d 1294 (10th Cir. 1996) (challenging the setoff of ASCS’ payments owed to debtor against the delinquent debt to SBA) Text
Lyle v. Commodity Credit Corp., 898 F. Supp. 808 (D. Kan. 1995) (offset of the price support payment due to farmer’s tax liability) Text
Logan Farms, Inc. v. Espy, 886 F. Supp. 781 (D. Kan. 1995) (overpayments under production adjustment program) Text
Brock v. United States, 94-1338-PFK, 1995 WL 144763 (D. Kan. Mar. 30, 1995) (Price Support and Production Adjustment Program; seeking reformation of a contract)
Olenhouse v. Commodity Credit Corp., 42 F.3d 1560 (10th Cir. 1994) (challenging deficiency payment reduction) Text
Logan Farms, Inc. v. Espy, 93-4256-SAC, 1994 WL 732672 (D. Kan. Nov. 25, 1994) (defining a “person” for payment limitation purposes)
Val Farms v. Espy, 29 F.3d 1470 (10th Cir. 1994) (eligibility for deficiency payments) Text
In re Buckner, 165 B.R. 942 (D. Kan. 1994) (right of setoff against annual CRP received by debtor) Text
In re Zweygardt, 149 B.R. 673 (D. Kan. 1992) (security interest in Conservation Reserve Program payments) Text
United States v. Goode, 781 F. Supp. 704 (D. Kan. 1991) (action to recover payments made under milk diversion program) Text
In re George, 119 B.R. 800 (D. Kan. 1990) (whether certificates were “proceeds” subject to security interests) Text
Randall Bank v. Melhus, 117 B.R. 648 (D. Kan. 1990) (government payments as collateral securing the bank’s debt) Text
In re Evatt, 112 B.R. 417 (W.D. Okla. 1990) (setoff of price support payments) Text
Boisseau v. Sullivan, 86-1939-K, 1989 WL 115750 (D. Kan. Sept. 13, 1989) (price support program; breach of contract, negligence)
Boisseau v. United States, 86-1939-K, 1989 WL 31442 (D. Kan. Mar. 10, 1989) (price support program; breach of contract, negligence)
In re Evatt, 112 B.R. 405 (Bankr. W.D. Okla. 1989) (setoff of price support payments) Text
In re Schneider, 864 F.2d 683 (10th Cir. 1988) (whether proceeds of PIK is a bankruptcy estate property) Text
In re Harvie, 84 B.R. 197 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1988) (perfected security interest in the CRP payment) Text
In re George, 85 B.R. 133 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1988) (whether CCC’s commodity certificates were subject to lien) Text
In re Clark, 82 B.R. 131 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1987) (security interest in farm program payments) Text
In re Holman, 85 B.R. 869 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1987) (PIK; securing preexisting indebtedness) Text
Raines v. Block, 798 F.2d 377 (10th Cir. 1986) (alleged breach of payment-in-kind contract) Text
In re Patsantaras Land & Livestock Co., 60 B.R. 24 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1986) (whether wool incentive payments were proceeds) Text
Coffey v. U.S. on Behalf of Commodity Credit Corp., 626 F. Supp. 1246 (D. Kan. 1986) (alteration of farmer’s bid under payment in kind program) Text
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Rolling Meadow Ranch Groves, LLC v. U.S. Dep’t Agric., 682 F.Supp. 3d 1253 (S.D. Fla. 2023) (finding Administrative Procedure Act violation when Farm Service Agency failed to use best-available data in calculating Wildlife and Hurricane Indemnity Program benefits) Text
Daniels v. Farm Serv. Agency, No. 1:20-cv-939-RAH, 2023 WL 2229239 (M.D. Ala. 2023) (denying appeal for Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program payments because applicant failed to preserve all issues for judicial review when he did not originally raise them with the National Appeals Division) Text
Shelley v. United States, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91060 (M.D. Ala. 2022) (appealing a decision to deny claims for crop disaster payments under the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program) Text
Davis v. U.S. Dep’t Agric., No. 5:14-CV-171, 2016 WL 9444332 (M.D. Ga. Sep. 29, 2016) (substantial evidence that plaintiff adopted scheme or device to evade payment limitations on farm program benefits)
Davis v. U.S. Dep’t Agric., No. 5:14-CV-171, 2016 WL 9444334 (M.D. Ga. Sep. 29, 2016) (considering requirements to qualify as “actively engaged in farming”)
McElmurray v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 535 F.Supp.2d 1318 (S.D. Ga. 2008) (denial of preventive planting subsidy payments) Text
American Peanut Shellers Ass’n v. Johanns, No. 4:04-CV-54, 2007 WL 2460773 (M.D. Ga. Aug. 24, 2007) (standing and factors in setting an alternative repayment rate for marketing assistance loans)
Mahon v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 485 F.3d 1247 (11th Cir. 2007) (review of denial of crop disaster payments) Text
In re Bracewell, 454 F.3d 1234 (11th Cir. 2006) (disaster payments not part of the bankruptcy estate) Text
In re Evans, 337 B.R. 551 (Bankr. E.D. N.C. 2005) (debtor’s rights in tobacco transition payments) Text
In re Thaggard, Nos. 01-60571, 01-670575, 01-70513, 2003 WL 24108186 (Bankr. M.D. Ga., April 3, 2003) (treatment of post-bankruptcy petition farm programs)
Bateman Co., Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 123 F. Supp. 2d 625 (M.D. Ga. 2000) (challenging requirement to reimburse deficiency and disaster payments) Text
In re Boyett, 250 B.R. 822 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2000) (whether crop loss disaster relief payment qualified for an exemption) Text
In re Boyett, 250 B.R. 817 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2000) (whether crop loss disaster relief payment was estate property) Text
Boyd v. Glickman, 12 F. Supp. 2d 1261 (M.D. Ala. 1998) (Peanut Price Support Program; challenging visual testing procedures) Text
Cole v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 33 F.3d 1263 (11th Cir. 1994) (imposition of monetary penalties for resale of “over-quota tobacco) Text
In re Jackson, 169 B.R. 742 (Bankr. N.D. Fla. 1994) (peanut allotment quota; protection under Florida homestead exemption law) Text
Brundidge Banking Co. v. Pike County Agric. Stabilization & Conservation Comm., 899 F.2d 1154 (11th Cir. 1990) (reallocation of farm’s peanut quota) Text
Tom’s Foods Inc. v. Lyng, 703 F. Supp. 1562 (M.D. Ga. 1989) (alleged violation of peanut price support regulations) Text
Fed. Land Bank of Columbia v. Shepard, 646 F. Supp. 1145 (M.D. Ga. 1986) (ownership and lien interest in a peanut quota) Text
Callaway v. Block, 763 F.2d 1283 (11th Cir. 1985) (action to bar reduction of national peanut quota) Text
D.C. CIRCUIT
Estate of Boyland v. Young, 242 F.Supp.3d 24 (D.D.C. 2017) (Title VI of the Civil Rights Act did not apply to alleged discrimination in USDA administrative claims process considering farm bill program benefits denial, because claims process itself was not a federally-funded program) Text
White v. Vilsack, 80 F.Supp.3d 123 (D.D.C. 2015) (Title VII is not grounds for monetary relief from historical discrimination by USDA, federally assisted programs are not federally funded programs) Text
American Meat Institute v. U.S. Dept. of Agric., 760 F.3d 18 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (interests other than correcting deception were sufficient to sustain country of origin labeling rule) Text
Partlo v. Johanns, Nos. Civ.A.04-1462 CKK, Civ.A.04-1779 CCK, 2006 WL 1663380 (D. D.C. June 11, 2006), aff’d, 224 F. App’x 7, 2007 WL 1411731 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (claim of higher assistance rate based on cultivation practices) Text
Holly Sugar Corp. v. Johanns, 437 F.3d 1210 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (upholding price support loan interest rate for sugar) Text
Garcia v. Johanns, 444 F.3d 625 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (denial of class certification for alleged farm program discrimination) Text
Nw. Indep. Producers Ass’n v. Veneman, 312 F.Supp.2d 23 (D. D.C. 2004) (milk program upheld) Text
Shaffer v. Veneman, 325 F.3d 370 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (breaches in settlement agreement) Text
Milk Train, Inc. v. Veneman, 310 F.3d 747 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (milk pricing system challenge) Text
Hershey Foods Corp. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 293 F.3d 520 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (milk pricing classifications) Text
Milk Train, Inc. v. Veneman, 167 F. Supp. 2d 20 (D. D.C. 2001) (challenging Secretary’s of Agriculture authority to issue rules for the DMLA programs) Text
Cerniglia v. Glickman, 118 F. Supp. 2d 27 (D. D.C. 2000) (denial of application for loan servicing of FSA; seeking judicial review) Text
Strong v. Glickman, 50 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D. D.C. 1999) (alleged violation of APA in canceling farmer’s CRP contract) Text
Deaf Smith County Grain Processors, Inc. v. Glickman, 162 F.3d 1206 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (seeking farm subsidy and disaster relief payments from USDA) Text
Pigford v. Glickman, 182 F.R.D. 341 (D. D.C. 1998) (class action alleging racial discrimination in granting of loans and subsidies)
Guy v. Glickman, 945 F. Supp. 324 (D. D.C. 1996) (seeking declaratory judgment reversing reduction of disaster benefits) Text
Washington Post Co. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 943 F. Supp. 31 (D. D.C. 1996) (seeking disclosure of information regarding participants of cotton subsidy program) Text
Competitive Enterprises Inst. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 954 F. Supp. 265 (D. D.C. 1996) (challenging Secretary’s of Agriculture quotas for domestically grown peanuts) Text
Vandervelde v. Espy, 908 F. Supp. 11 (D. D.C. 1995) (whether plaintiffs were entitled to payments for their participation in the Dairy Termination Program) Text
Jones v. Espy, CIV. A. 90-2831-LFO, 1993 WL 102641 (D. D.C. Mar. 17, 1993) (defining a “person” for purposes of government payment programs)
Peterson Farms I v. Madigan, CIV. A. 91-2340 (JHG), 1992 WL 118370 (D. D.C. May 20, 1992) (suspension from participation in a price support program)
Peterson Farms I v. Madigan, 782 F. Supp. 1 (D. D.C. 1991) (eligibility to participate in price support programs) Text
Kumm v. United States, CIV. A. 90-1280, 1991 WL 255443 (D. D.C. Nov. 12, 1991) (defining a “person” for payment limitation purposes)
Vandervelde v. Yeutter, 774 F. Supp. 645 (D. D.C. 1991) (denial of payments under Dairy Termination Program) Text
Women Involved in Farm Econ. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 876 F.2d 994 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (constitutionality of regulation for agricultural crop subsidy payments) Text
Esch v. Yeutter, 876 F.2d 976 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (suspension from price support programs) Text
Women Involved In Farm Econ. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 682 F. Supp. 599 (D. D.C. 1988) (constitutionality of regulation for agricultural crop subsidy payments) Text
Baker v. Lyng, CIV. A. 87-1643-LFO, 1987 WL 123789 (D. D.C. Aug. 4, 1987) (defining a “person” for the purposes of the price support programs)
Esch v. Lyng, 665 F. Supp. 6 (D. D.C. 1987) (challenging suspension from price support programs) Text
FEDERAL CIRCUIT
Parker v. United States, 131 Fed. Cl. 1 (Fed. Cl. 2017) (USDA has no obligation to forgive farm ownership loan under Pigford consent decree)
Earman v. United States, 114 Fed.Cl. 81, (Fed. Cl. 2013) (reformation of contract in which Conservation Security Program (CSP) payments were at issue was not warranted)
Meyers v. United States, 96 Fed.Cl. 34 (Fed. Cl. 2010) (Conservation Security Program (CSP) statute not a money-mandating source of law)
Bair v. United States., 80 Fed. Cl. 287 (Fed. Cl. 2007) (no taking for lien held by CCC)
Bruhn v. United States, 74 Fed. Cl. 749 (Fed. Cl. 2006) (no breach of program payment contracts)
Steen v. United States, 468 F.3d 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (upholding denial of trade assistance benefits) Text
Cotrell v.United States, 71 Fed. Cl. 559 (Fed. Cl. 2006) (failure to exhaust remedies)
Members of the Peanut Quota Holders Ass’n v. United States, 421 F.3d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 904 (peanut quota not compensable property interest) Text
Star-Glo Assoc., LP v. United States, 414 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (limiting citrus disaster payments to actual trees planted) Text
Gutz v. United States, 98-785L, 2000 WL 1276749 (Fed. Cl. July 28, 2000) (awarding plaintiff’s costs under EAJA; challenge of ineligibility for price support)
Gutz v. United States, 98-785L, 1999 WL 1086946 (Fed. Cl. Nov. 23, 1999) (alleged SCS’s breach of agreement in not providing commodity price support payments)
Doty v. United States, 109 F.3d 746 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (alleging breach of milk production termination contract) Text
State of Mont. v. United States, 94-108C, 1995 WL 291843 (Fed. Cl. May 10, 1995) (priority of CCC’s lien for loans made under its sugar price support program)
Doty v. United States, 53 F.3d 1244 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (breach of contract under Dairy Termination Program)
Wardlaw Farms, Inc. v. United States, 92-726C, 1994 WL 715222 (Fed. Cl. Dec. 23, 1994) (eligibility for Dairy Termination Program)
Schuerman v. United States, 93-203C, 1994 WL 48468 (Fed. Cl. Feb. 10, 1994) (whether a contract with FmHA for guaranteed loans exists)
Rochman v. United States, 376-88C, 1992 WL 346768 (Fed. Cl. Nov. 24, 1992) (eligibility for agricultural price support program)
Milligan v. United States, 26 Cl. Ct. 1386 (Cl. Ct. 1992) (defining a “person” under the Emergency Livestock Feed Assistance Act)
Simons v. United States, 25 Cl. Ct. 685 (Cl. Ct. 1992) (denial of payments under Dairy Termination Program)
Gratz v. United States, 25 Cl. Ct. 411 (Cl. Ct. 1992) (damages for the calling of corn loan collateral by the ASCS)
Bar 9 Farms, Inc. v. United States, 25 Cl. Ct. 392 (Cl. Ct. 1992) (defining a “person” for the purposes of price support programs)
Schultz v. United States, 25 Cl. Ct. 384 (Cl. Ct. 1992) (defining a “person” for the purposes of price support programs)
Doko Farms v. United States, 956 F.2d 1136 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (offset of the overpayments against subsidy payments) Text
Doty v. United States, 24 Cl. Ct. 615 (Cl. Ct. 1991) (alleged breach of dairy termination program contract)
Rivercrest v. United States, 24 Cl. Ct. 454 (Cl. Ct. 1991) (eligibility for disaster credit for wheat crop)
Ryder Farms, Inc. v. United States, 24 Cl. Ct. 278 (Cl. Ct. 1991) (eligibility for price support payments)
Associated Milk Producers, Inc. v. United States, 22 Cl. Ct. 682 (Cl. Ct. 1991) (implementation of milk price reduction provisions of FSA)
Knaub v. United States, 22 Cl. Ct. 268 (Cl. Ct. 1991) (defining a “person” for payment limitations purposes)
Doko Farms v. United States, 21 Cl. Ct. 696 (Cl. Ct. 1990) (release of funds from participation in price support program)
Pender Peanut Corp. v. United States, 21 Cl. Ct. 95 (Cl. Ct. 1990) (challenging penalty imposed under peanut price support system)
Stevens v. United States, 21 Cl. Ct. 195 (Cl. Ct. 1990) (denial of application for participation in wheat subsidy program)
Martin v. United States, 20 Cl. Ct. 738 (Cl. Ct. 1990) (denial of dairy termination program payments)
Frank’s Livestock & Poultry Farm, Inc. v. United States, 905 F.2d 1515 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (denial of price support program benefits) Text
Pender Peanut Corp. v. United States, 20 Cl. Ct. 447 (Cl. Ct. 1990) (challenging penalty imposed under peanut price support system)
Hubbs v. United States, 20 Cl. Ct. 423 (Cl. Ct. 1990) (breach of loan contract; CCC’s failure to promptly negotiate)
Stegall v. United States, 19 Cl. Ct. 765 (Cl. Ct. 1990) (challenging ASCS’ limitation of farm subsidy)
Alta Verde Indus., Inc. v. United States, 18 Cl. Ct. 595 (Cl. Ct. 1989) (Dairy Termination Program, economic harm to the beef industry)
Grav v. United States, 886 F.2d 1305 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (denial of milk diversion program payments) Text
Halbert v. United States, 17 Cl. Ct. 596 (Cl. Ct. 1989) (eligibility to participate in milk diversion program program)
Frank’s Livestock & Poultry Farm, Inc. v. United States, 17 Cl. Ct. 601 (Cl. Ct. 1989) (denial of price support program benefits)
Durant v. United States, 16 Cl. Ct. 447 (Cl. Ct. 1988) (breach of contract; USASCS’ failure to make feed grain payments)
Doko Farms v. United States, 861 F.2d 255 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (release of funds from participation in price support program) Text
Parks v. United States, 15 Cl. Ct. 183 (Cl. Ct. 1988) (challenging termination from Milk Diversion Program)
Swartz v. United States, 14 Cl. Ct. 570 (Cl. Ct. 1988) (curtailment of CCC’s price support loans)
Grav v. United States, 14 Cl. Ct. 390 (Cl. Ct. 1988) (denial of milk diversion program payments)
O’Connell v. United States, 14 Cl. Ct. 309 (Cl. Ct. 1988) (eligibility for milk diversion program)
Willson v. United States, 14 Cl. Ct. 300 (Cl. Ct. 1988) (eligibility for price support payments)
Hanson v. United States, 13 Cl. Ct. 519 (Cl. Ct. 1987) (denial of agricultural emergency loan)
Doko Farms v. United States, 13 Cl. Ct. 48 (Cl. Ct. 1987) (release of funds from participation in price support program)
Raines v. United States, 12 Cl. Ct. 530 (Cl. Ct. 1987) (alleging breach of a PIK contract)
Nutt v. United States, 12 Cl. Ct. 345 (Cl. Ct. 1987) (breach of contract under loan agreements with the FmHA)
Morgan v. United States, 12 Cl. Ct. 247 (Cl. Ct. 1987) (eligibility for participation in milk diversion program)
Hilo Coast Processing Co. v. United States, 816 F.2d 629 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (defining “marketing” for purpose of price support payment program) Text
Pettersen v. United States, 807 F.2d 993 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (challenging the denial of Feed Grain Program payments) Text
Haupricht Bros., Inc. v. United States, 11 Cl. Ct. 369 (Cl. Ct. 1986) (denial of PIK benefits)
Gibson v. United States, 11 Cl. Ct. 6 (Cl. Ct. 1986) (eligibility to participate in PIK program)
Pettersen v. United States, 10 Cl. Ct. 194 (Cl. Ct. 1986) (challenging the denial of Feed Grain Program payments)
Pope v. United States, 9 Cl. Ct. 479 (Cl. Ct. 1986) (eligibility for program benefits, negligence)
Amalgamated Sugar Co. v. United States, 770 F.2d 1042 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (price support loan program, change in accounting methods) Text
Hilo Coast Processing v. United States, 7 Cl. Ct. 175 (Cl. Ct. 1985) (eligibility for price support payment program)
ALABAMA
Mills v. Davis, 577 So. 2d 436 (Ala. 1991) (whether peanut quota was a personal property) Text
Sessions Co., Inc. v. Turner, 493 So. 2d 1387 (Ala. 1986) (peanut quota; breach of contract) Text
GEORGIA
Shepard v. Fed. Land Bank of Columbia, 421 S.E.2d 763 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992) (ownership and lien interest in disputed peanut quota) Text
Weil Bros.-Cotton, Inc. v. T.E.A., Inc., 351 S.E.2d 670 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986) (failure to deliver the cotton allocated under PIK contracts) Text
INDIANA
Webb v. Schleutker, 891 N.E.2d 1144 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (counter-cyclical payments are marital property) Text
IOWA
Mart v. Mart, 824 N.W.2d 535 (Iowa Ct. App. 2012) (Swampbuster violation and benefit eligibility) Text
In re Estate of Tremel, 00-1283, 2001 WL 855412 (Iowa Ct. App. July 31, 2001) (security interest in government payments)
Allison-Kesley Ag Ctr., Inc. v. Hildebrand, 485 N.W.2d 841 (Iowa 1992) (fraudulent payment-in-kind certificates) Text
KANSAS
Rural Gas, Inc. v. N. Cent. Kansas Prod. Credit Corp., 755 P.2d 529 (Kan. 1988) (perfected security interest in the ASCS’ deficiency payments) Text
KENTUCKY
Jones v. Jones, 245 S.W.3d 815 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008) (tobacco transition payments are non-marital property) Text
MICHIGAN
Conagra, Inc. v. Farmers State Bank, 602 N.W.2d 390 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999) (government disaster payments were proceeds of the bean crop) Text
MINNESOTA
Prod. Credit Ass’n of Fairmont v. Martin County Nat. Bank of Fairmont, 384 N.W.2d 529 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986) (whether security interest extended to PIK entitlements) Text
Roseberg v. Steen, 363 N.W.2d 102 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985) (replevin action for possession of debtors’ PIK wheat allotment) Text
NORTH CAROLINA
Brown v. Ginn, 640 S.E.2d 787 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007) (tobacco transition payments pre-marital property) Text
OHIO
Diehl, Inc. v. Ohio Dep’t of Agric., 806 N.E.2d 533 (Ohio 2004) (dormant Commerce Clause issues)
OKLAHOMA
Farmers & Merchants Nat. Bank, Fairview v. Fairview State Bank, 766 P.2d 330 (Okla. 1988) (whether payment-in-kind Diversion Program benefits were proceeds) Text
Farmers & Merchants Nat. Bank, Fairview v. Sooner Co-op., Inc., 766 P.2d 325 (Okla. 1988) (whether PIK payments qualified as “proceeds”) Text
TEXAS
Sweetwater Prod. Credit Ass’n v. O’Briant, 764 S.W.2d 230 (Tex. 1988) (claims of priority to proceeds under PIK contracts) Text
O’Briant v. Sweetwater Prod. Credit Ass’n, 745 S.W.2d 412 (Tex. App. 1988) (seeking proceeds under PIK contract) Text
WASHINGTON
Rainier Nat. Bank v. Bachmann, 757 P.2d 979 (Wash. 1988) (security interest in dairy termination program payments) Text
WISCONSIN
State v. Johnson, 439 N.W.2d 646 (Wis. Ct. App. 1989) (alleged forgery to obtain payments under a federal farm program)