In re: Tyson Foods, In., Chicken Raised Without Antibiotics Consumer Litig.

Case # 08-md-01982
Case Name In re: Tyson Foods, In., Chicken Raised Without Antibiotics Consumer Litig.
Jurisdiction US District Court for MD
Summary

Beginning in June 2007, Tyson marketed its chicken products as "Raised Without Antibiotics." Doing so allowed Tyson to capitalize on consumer interest in healthier and more natural foods. The chicken products in question were sold as "antibiotic-free" even though Tyson administered antibiotics to these chickens at two points in their lives. This antibiotic administration was not disclosed to consumers. Plaintiffs sought both monetary and injunctive relief against the Defendant. 

Final Approval Date 06/02/2010
Result
  1. Final Approval granted.
  2. Objectors Cox and Sibley (through Attorney Cox) and Needham-Ward, Turner, and Horrell (through Attorneys Miller and Weinstein) appealed the Final Approval.
  3. Judge Bennett approved the Motion for Depositions of the Appellants, even overruling a Motion to Quash on 07/28/2010.
  4. All appeals were withdrawn within five days of that Order.
Dismissal of Last Appeal 08/02/2010
Attachments Amended Complaint.pdf
Preliminary Approval.pdf
Plaintiff's Response to Objections.pdf
Final Approval.pdf
Final Judgment.pdf
Motion for Depositions of Appellants.pdf
Order Granting Motion for Depositions of Appellants.pdf
Motion to Quash Deposition of Thomas Cox.pdf
Opposition to Motion to Quash Deposition of Thomas Cox.pdf
Order to Take Telephonic Deposition of Thomas Cox.pdf
Docket Report.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Lisa F. Estep, Robert Falkner

Objectors Lisa F. Estep
Robert Falkner
Signers Edward F. Siegel
Attorneys Edward F. Siegel
Edward W. Cochran
Summary
  1. Estimations of the Settlement amount are vastly inflated.
  2. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  3. Cy pres provisions are not clear.
  4. "Clear sailing" provisions of the fee motion are improper.
Attachments Objection of Lisa Estep and Robert Falkner.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Sallie Turner, Jennifer Horrell

Objectors Sallie Turner
Jennifer Horrell
Signers Jeffrey L. Weinstein
Attorneys Jeffrey L. Weinstein
Summary
  1. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  2. Release is overbroad.
  3. Unclaimed funds should be distributed to class members, not cy pres recipients.
Attachments Objection of Sallie Turner and Jennifer Horrell.pdf
Appeal of Objectors Needham-Ward et al.pdf
Dismissal of Appeal of Needham-Ward et al.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Sara Sibley

Objectors Sara Sibley
Signers Sara Sibley
Attorneys
Summary
  1. Notice was not conspicuously posted at all stores retailing Tyson chicken.
  2. Coupon provisions are not fair to class members.
  3. Do coupons expire?
  4. Are coupons transferable?
  5. Coupons function as a sales promotion for Defendant.
  6. Class representative incentive awards are excessive.
  7. Attorneys' fees are excessive.

NOTE: It is likely that this Objector was at least assisted by Thomas Cox, Jr but that was never definitively established.

Attachments Objection of Sara Sibley.pdf
Appeal of Objectors Thomas Cox and Sara Sibley.pdf
Dismissal of Appeal of Cox and Sibley.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Shelagh Needham-Ward

Objectors Shelagh Needham-Ward
Signers Steve A. Miller
Attorneys Steve A. Miller
Summary
  1. Cash payments are illusory, since it is unlikely that class members have a proof of purchase.
  2. Coupon provisions would be a windfall for Defendant.
  3. Attorneys' fees should not be awarded until the true value to the class is determined.
  4. Class representative incentive awards are excessive.
  5. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  6. Cy pres awards do not benefit the class.
Attachments Objection of Shelagh Needham-Ward.pdf
Appeal of Objectors Needham-Ward et al.pdf
Dismissal of Appeal of Needham-Ward et al.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Thomas L. Cox Jr.

Objectors Thomas L. Cox Jr.
Signers Thomas L. Cox Jr.
Attorneys Thomas L. Cox Jr.
Summary
  1. Notice is not adequately available to class members.
  2. Class membership requires a "mini trial" to determine if an individual qualifies.
  3. Coupon provisions are not fair to class members.
  4. Do coupons expire?
  5. Are coupons transferable?
  6. Coupon provisions would be a windfall for Defendant.
  7. Class representative incentive awards are excessive.
  8. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
Attachments Objection of Thomas Cox.pdf
Appeal of Objectors Thomas Cox and Sara Sibley.pdf
Dismissal of Appeal of Cox and Sibley.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated