CALTEC AG, Plaintiff & Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF PESTICIDE REGULATION et al., Defendants & Respondents., No. F074334, 2019 WL 76806 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 2, 2019) Appellant Caltec Ag, Inc. (Caltec) challenges a final administrative decision of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (Department or DPR) that three of Caltec’s products were pesticides. Pursuant to Food and Agricultural Code sections 12993 and 12999.4, the Department imposed fines totaling $784,000, finding that the products should have been registered as pesticides before being sold in California. The court affirms.
IN RE JUBILEE FARMS, & QUICKERT FARMS, LLC DEBTORS, No. 18-30080, 2018 WL 6841352 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. Dec. 28, 2018) Jubilee Farms and Quickert Farms, LLC seek confirmation of their Amended Chapter 12 Plan. The Chapter 12 Trustee, Farm Credit Mid-America, FLCA (“FCMA”), and Farm Credit Services of America, PCA (“FCS”) object. FCS also asks for relief from the automatic stay. An evidentiary hearing was held on December 20, 2018, to address whether the plan is feasible. The matter was then taken under submission. The Debtors failed to prove their proposed plan was feasible beyond March 2019, so the proposed plan was not confirmable.
IN RE TRENTON FARMS RE, LLC, PERMIT NO. MOGS10520; MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND MISSOURI CLEAN WATER COMMISSION, Respondents, v. HICKORY NEIGHBORS UNITED, INC., Appellant., No. WD 81385, 2019 WL 73232 (Mo. Ct. App. Jan. 2, 2019) Hickory Neighbors United, Inc. (“Hickory Neighbors”) seeks judicial review of the decision of the Missouri Clean Water Commission (“CWC”) to approve a permit application filed by Trenton Farms RE, LLC (“Trenton Farms”) for a swine concentrated animal feeding operation (“CAFO”) in Grundy County, Missouri. Hickory Neighbors argues that because manure storage structures would be located in the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) Zone A 100-year floodplain, it was error as a matter of law to approve the permit. Hickory Neighbors also argues that certain commissioners on the CWC were unconstitutionally or unlawfully appointed, or had conflicts of interest precluding them from participating in the permit approval process. Finally, Hickory Neighbors argues that the CWC abused its discretion in denying its request for a continuance. Finding no error the court affirms the ruling. .
Mantikas v. Kellogg Co., 910 F.3d 633 (2d Cir. 2018)
Plaintiffs Kristen Mantikas, Kristin Burns, and Linda Castle (“Plaintiffs”) appeal from a judgment entered on August 21, 2017 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Sandra J. Feuerstein, J.), granting Defendant Kellogg Company’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint for failure to state a claim, as provided in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Plaintiffs are residents of New York and California who purchased Defendant’s Cheez-It crackers that were labeled “whole grain” or “made with whole grain.” They filed a class action complaint (the “Complaint”) against Defendant alleging that the whole grain labels were false and misleading in violation of New York and California consumer protection laws. They alleged that such labeling would cause a reasonable consumer to believe that the grain in whole grain Cheez-Its was predominantly whole grain, when, in fact, it was not. The primary grain content was enriched white flour. The district court dismissed the Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). It held that the whole grain labels would not mislead a reasonable consumer, and that Plaintiffs therefore failed to state a claim.
The court concluded that the district court erred in dismissing Plaintiffs’ complaint. Reviewed under the proper standards for a Rule 12(b)(6)motion, the Complaint plausibly alleged that a reasonable consumer would be misled by Defendant’s whole grain labels to believe that the grain in whole grain Cheez-Its was predominantly whole grain. Accordingly, the court vacates the judgment of the district court and remand for further proceedings.