On Wednesday, Judge Thomas M. Durkin of the Northern District of Illinois granted a request from some of the direct-action plaintiffs to amend their complaint in the consolidated antitrust suit regarding the broiler chicken industry and add defendants and claims.
According to the Order, two additional proposed defendants, Case and Keystone, have been listed in some of the consolidated complaints and were named as co-conspirators in January 2018. The other defendant that will be added is Rabobank, who has been involved in discovery and depositions but has not been named in any of the direct action complaints. Another modification that the Order allowed was to add “RICO claims based on a conspiracy to manipulate the Georgia Dock price index,” which has reportedly been part of some complaints.
The direct action plaintiffs include businesses, like restaurants and grocers, and individuals who purchased broiler chicken directly from the defendants. They claimed that many major chicken companies conspired to artificially raise the price of broiler chickens, which are bred to sell for meat. This consolidated lawsuit is one of many filed in the meat industry purporting that Agri Stats, which provides information among agriculture companies, has facilitated the purported antitrust activity among various meatpacking companies.
Judge Durkin explained that the deadline to amend pleadings passed in April 2019, but the scheduling in the consolidated case was extended from October 2019 to June 2021. Because of this change he determined that the plaintiffs were “diligent in bringing this motion relative to the current scheduling order.”
The defendants reportedly argued against the motion to amend, stating that it was without good cause and that the plaintiffs should have asked for the amendments sooner. Further, they contended that the amendments would broaden the case. However, the Judge noted that the defendants did not argue that the amendments would cause a further delay in the scheduling of the lawsuit.
Wednesday’s Order said, “currently, this case is primarily about a supply-reduction conspiracy and a conspiracy to rig the Georgia Dock price index. The addition of the proposed defendants and claims to certain complaints does not add new theories to the case nor broaden its scope. As such, there should be no impact on the scheduling order. Without an impact on the scheduling order, Plaintiffs’ delay in bringing this motion cannot be characterized as lacking diligence or prejudicing Defendants.”