MONTGOMERY, Ala., Dec. 17 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- An attorney for Tyson
Foods, Inc. (NYSE: TSN) told an appeals court panel today that a federal judge
ruled correctly when he cleared the company of wrongdoing in a cattle pricing
lawsuit.
Carter Phillips, an attorney representing Tyson Foods, today said Judge
Lyle Strom was right when he reversed a jury verdict against Tyson in April by
ruling the company did not violate the law through its supply agreements with
independent cattle producers.
Phillips also noted the judge ruled the company has legitimate business
reasons for entering into such agreements, such as a "reliable and consistent
supply of fed cattle, allowing it to operate its plants in an efficient
manner."
Tyson officials maintain this case is about the freedom of cattle
producers to decide how they want to do business. There are thousands of
producers across the country, who prefer selling cattle through various
marketing agreements with meatpackers, because they believe it's more
efficient and rewards them for producing high quality livestock.
The plaintiffs oppose cattle marketing agreements and want sales limited
to a daily negotiated cash market basis. They sued Tyson Fresh Meats -- known
as IBP when the suit was filed in 1996 -- in an effort to get the federal
courts to give them what they want. After failing to prevail in any aspect of
the case in district court, they appealed to the 11th Circuit Court of
Appeals, which heard oral arguments today in Montgomery, Alabama.
It is unknown when the three-member appeals court panel will release its
ruling on the plaintiffs' appeal. Such decisions typically take three to six
months but can sometimes take longer.
Tyson Fresh Meats does not own cattle feed yards in the U.S. The company
competes with other packers for available market-ready cattle. Tyson buys
cattle on a daily cash market basis, as well as through various marketing
agreements initiated by cattle producers who approached the company about
developing a better way to sell their livestock.
Contrary to the plaintiffs' allegations of "captive supply," these
agreements allow the producers -- not Tyson -- to decide when their cattle are
ready for delivery. In fact, Judge Strom wrote that the "captive supply"
label is "somewhat of a misnomer," since "these marketing arrangements were
initiated by cattle producers" who were under "no obligation to deliver cattle
to the packer until such cattle were designated by the producer for delivery."
SOURCE Tyson Foods, Inc.
 back to top
Related links:
http://www.tyson.com
CONTACT:
Gary Mickelson of Tyson Foods, Inc.,
+1-479-290-6111
|
