A federal judge has granted preliminary settlements totaling $7.4 million in a series of class action lawsuits accusing Hormel Foods Corp. of price-fixing by participating in a conspiracy to manipulate pork product prices, as reported by Bloomberg.
Judge John Tunheim of the US District Court for the District of Minnesota approved the settlements between Hormel and two plaintiff classes that include both direct purchasers of pork products and commercial and institutional indirect purchasers. These settlements mark a milestone for a legal saga that began in 2018, with accusations that major pork producers had colluded to restrict pork supplies, thus inflating consumer prices in violation of antitrust laws.
The lawsuits allege that dominant players in the pork industry, controlling a significant portion of the nation’s pork supply, conspired for years to manipulate prices. Central to these allegations is the purported use of data from Indiana-based Agri Stats, a company which the Department of Justice sued last fall over similar antitrust concerns.
Read more: Antitrust Lawsuit Targets Hotel Giants for Alleged Price Fixing with AI
Despite the latest developments, the accused pork companies have strongly denied the allegations. However, several industry giants, including JBS, Tyson and Smithfield, have opted to settle, collectively paying out over $200 million to resolve the lawsuits against them, as detailed in Bloomberg’s report.
This latest actions underscore the complexity and scale of the legal challenges facing the pork industry. While the settlements represent a step towards resolution for some parties involved, the broader implications of these allegations continue to ripple through the agricultural sector.
Source: News Bloomberg Law
Featured News
Judge Allows FTC Antitrust Case Against Amazon to Move Forward
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
SAP Leader Urges Caution on EU AI Rules, Warns of Competitive Disadvantage
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Colorado’s Grocery Workers Unite to Oppose $24.6 Billion Supermarket Merge
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Canada’s Competition Bureau Warns Businesses of Tougher Enforcement
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Top Antitrust Lawyers Launch New Boutique Firm
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh