FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK PESTICIDE
PROJECT
Return to FAN's Pesticide Homepage
Return to Fipronil
Index Page
See
also:
• A
little background on the geneology and events of the insecticide Icon
• News
Items related to the settlement for Louisiana Crawfish Farmers harmed by Icon
• Campaign
against Bayer Dangers
Fipronil: Index to some documents
and reports pertaining to the
Class Action Suit of Louisiana Crawfish Farmers
|
Some
documents and reports concerning the Class Action Suit of Louisiana Crawfish Farmers |
||
Date | Document | Details |
December 3, 1999 (4 pages) |
Original
Petition for Damages Civil
Docket No. 99-C-4984-A |
On or about March 19, 1999, rice and crawfish farmers purchased rice seed from G & H Seed in Eunice, St. Landry Parish, Louisiana. The seed was sprayed with a chemical identified as Fipronil/Icon by G & H Seed Copany at its business in Eunice, St. Landry Parish, Louisiana. The Fipronil/Icon sprayed rice seed was then transported to a crop duster, and applied onto rice/crawfish fields owned by plaintiffs. The resulting effect of applying the Fipronil/Icon sprayed rice onto the rice/crawfish fields, caused a complete crawfish mortality, resulting in damages to plaintiffs' 1999 Spring crawfish crop, as well as their 1999 - 2000 crop. |
January 25, 2000 (19 pages) |
First
Amended, Supplemental and Restated Petition for Damages Civil Docket No. 99-C-4984-A 17th Judicial District Court, St. Landry Parish, Louisiana |
CLASS ACTION PETITION. Defendant Rhone negligently tested, formulated and manufactured Icon, a defective product which caused harm to the Plaintiffs, failed to properly ensure that the Defendant Class did not cause damage to crawfish through the use of Icon, and were negligent in the manufacturing and distribution of Icon... Rhone manufactures Icon for use as a pesticide. Rhone negligently manufactured and tested Icon prior to putting it on the market. Rhone knew or should have known that Icon would be used in rice fields in Louisiana which also harvested crawfish, but failed to conduct any tests which proved the safety of Icon on Louisiana's crawfish crop. In fact, although Icon has been used for approximately one year, Rhone is now expected to warn the Plaintiffs that Icon is dangerous and lethal to crawfish. |
Undated (7 pages) |
Second Amended and Supplemental Petition for Damages Civil Docket No. 99-C-4984-A 17th Judicial District Court, St. Landry Parish, Louisiana |
• During the
1998 to 1999 crop year, Don H. Alleman owned
and farmed crawfish under the corporte name of Quaity Aquaculture, Inc.
Don H. Alleman and Quality Aquaculture, Inc. sustained
a monumental loss of more than 75,000 pounds of crawfish during that crop
year as a direct result of tailwater containing Icon and/or any
or all of its derivatives in the water or sediment flooding Don H. Alleman
and Quality Aquaculture, Inc.'s crawfish acreage. |
August 3, 2001 | SUBLEGALS, VOL. 4, NO. 5 | Louisiana crawfish fishermen win Class Action certification in lawsuit against pesticide manufacturer. |
July 30, 2001 |
Judge James T. Genovese 27th Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Landry, Louisiana. |
Excerpt: Considering the proof presented by the plaintiffs, the defense to said class certification presented by the defendants, including the facts, testimony and evidence produced at this class certification hearing and briefs of counsel, the court finds that the requirements for class certification have been met by the plaintiffs... |
August 28, 2002 | State of Louisiana Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part, and Remanded for Trial on the Merits. Court composed of
JUDGES: Appeal from the 27th
Judicial District Court |
This Court of Appeal upheld the Class Action suit by documenting previous legal cases with responses to the defendants ... Excerpt: At this procedural stage of the suit, we are concerned only with the propriety of the certification ... In July 1998, the [US EPA] authorized Aventis to market the insecticide, and it was extensively introduced into the Louisiana market in 1999. The chemical was sold in liquid form to send distributors/applicators who, pursuant to contracts with Aventis, applied ICON to rice seed prior to planting. The purpose of the chemical treatment was to combat the rice water weevil. In Louisiana, rice and crawfish are often conjunctively farmed, either in the same pond or in close proximity to one another. The rotaation patterns for the two crops vary, but water that has been used in a rice field ("tailwater") is sometimes employed to irrigate crawfish ponds. After planting, tailwater might also be dischared into surrounding ditches and canals, and a downstream crawfish farmer may retrieve this tailwater and introduce it into his pond. Crawfish are not always grown in rice fields. The state-wide crawfish harvest declined by millions of pounds from 1999 to 2000. Plaintiffs allege that the use of ICON-treated rice seed in certain ponds had a devastating efffect on co-cultured crawfish harvests in 1999 and 2000. Some farmers have experienced total loss of their crawfish crop; others have experienced a commercially damaging decline. Plaintiffs allege that once reports began to mount regarding ICON's ill effects on the crawfish industry, Aventis conducted field tests and concluded that any increase in crawfish mortality resulted either from a misapplication of ICON, was unrelated to ICON, or was attributable to the severe 1998 drought. Plaintiffs also allege that the Department of Agriculture only tested for the presence of Fipronil, the acive ingredient in ICON. Fipronil was found in extremely low levels and, therefore, could not be conclusively linked to crawfish mortality. Plaintiffs argue, however, that these low levels resut from the ingredient's tendency to rapidly break down into derivatives which bind to soil particles and do not dissolve in water. |
August 28, 2002 | Website
of for the Plaintiffs |
On August 28, 2002, the Louisiana Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's class certification of a class, defined by the following three subclasses:
|
September 13, 2002 | ENS | Suit Charges Pesticide Damaged Crawfish Farms |
October 10, 2002 | AgJournal.com | Crawfish farmers upset with Aventis |
February 6, 2004 | Delta Farm Press | Icon rice seed treatment to be pulled from market ... After 2004, no more Icon will be manufactured for rice. Any remaining supplies can be utilized through 2006 ... Last year, about 30 percent of Arkansas' rice acres (close to 500,000 acres) had Icon on it ... |
March 29, 2004 (66 pages) |
Settlement Agreement | Excerpts: 1.11 The term "Compromising Parties" or "Compromising Party" shall mean and refer to
•
See Reference 1 below for more excerpts |
March 29, 2004 (6 pages) |
Order of Preliminary Approval of Proposed Settlement Signed by Judge James T. Genovese 27th Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Landry, Louisiana. |
Excerpt: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Settling Insurer and the Compromising Parties pay into the Escrow Account the sum of Forty-Five Million and No/100 ($45,000,000.00) Dollars (the "Settlement Fund") within sixty (60) days of the execution of the Settlement Agreement. |
On or soon after March 29, 2004 (1 page) |
Legal Notice | Excerpts from Notice that appeared in the print media: WHO'S INCLUDED?
Generally, the Class includes people and legal entities in Louisiana who,
since January 1999, claim their crawfish crops were damaged by exposure
to ICON, and who either: |
May 27, 2004 (8 pages) |
Signed by Judge James T. Genovese 27th Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Landry, Louisiana. |
(17) Except as otherwise provided in the Settlement Agreement, and and all persons and entities, excluding the Opt-Out Parties, are hereby finally and permanently barred and enjoined from instituting, maintaining, and/or prosecuting against the Released Parties any cause of action Related to the Episode (including, without limitation, all caused of ction based on claims of the Class as set forth in the Class Action); (20) Except as otherwise provided in the Settlement Agreement, each member of the Class is hereby required to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Released Parties from and against any and all past, present, or future claims, demands, suits, causes of action, rights of action, liabilities, liens, privileges, or judgments of any kind whatsoever by, on behalf of, through, or deriving solely from the claims of that member of the Class, or by, on behalf of , through, or deriving from his, her, or its heirs, executors, representaties, attorneys or former attorneys, successors, employers, insurers, employers insurers, health insurers, health care providers, assignees, subrogees, predecessors in interest, successors in interest, beneficiaries or survivors, arising out of or in any way Related to the Episode, all as more fully set forth in the Settlement Agreement. (29) Neither this Final Order and Judgment nor the Settlement Agreement (nor any other document referred to herein, nor any action taken to carry out this Final Order and Judgment) may be construced as, or may be used as an admission or concession by or against the Compromising Parties, the Related Parties, and/or the Settling Insurer of the validity of any claim or any actual or potential fault, wrongdoing or liability whatsoever... |
July 16, 2004 (2 pages) |
Icon Litigation Group |
A list of the documents that claimants have to have to have to get reimbursement from the Class Action Suit |
July 28, 2004 | The Lafayette Daily Advertiser [Louisiana] | Settlement a boon for crawfish farmers Potentially a thousand or more South Louisiana crawfish farmers are in line to share in $24 million of the $45 million Icon pesticide settlement ... |
July 30, 2004 |
Lake Charles, Louisiana |
Settlement for LA Crawfish Farmers ... About $21 million in the settlement was eaten up in court costs, administrative and lawyer fees ... |
August 2, 2004 | KATC 3 TV. Acadiana's (LA) News Channel | Crawfish farmers need to prove losses to reap settlement money Armed with records showing crop losses, crawfish farmers this week will start the process of staking their claims to 24 (m) million dollars won in a legal settlement with the manufacturer of a pesticide linked to crop losses ... Production records, sales records, tax returns and expense accounts will be among the documents farmers will bring to show damage ... |
|
Reference 2: | ||
Client | LAW FIRM | Attorney(s) |
Bayer CropScience LP | Kean, Miller, Hawthorne,
D'Armond, McCowan & Jarman, L.L.P. Baton Rouge LA |
Gary A. Bezet M. Dwaye Johnson Gregory M. Anding |
G & H Seed Company and Crowley Grain Drier, Inc. | Plauche, Miselli, Landry
& Parkerson, L.L.P. New Orleans LA |
Arthur W. Landry H. Edward Barousse, III |
Nolan J. Guillot, Inc. and Mamou Rice Drier and Warehouse, Incorporated | Dauzat, Falgoust, Caviness
and Bievenu Opelousas LA |
Peter F. Caviness |
Allianz Global Risks US Insurance Company | McCranie, Sistrunk,
Anzelmo, Hardy, Maxwell & McDaniel Covington LA |
Michael T. Pulaski |
The lawyers who have been appointed by the Court to represent Class Members as Class Counsel are: | Neblett, Beard &
Arsenault Alexandria LA |
Richard J. Arsenault Willie Neblett |
Andrus, Boudreaux,
Lemoine & Tonore Lafayette LA |
Vance R. Andrus |
|
Lieff, Cabraser, Heinmann
& Bernstein, LLP San Francisco CA |
Elizabeth J. Cabraser Melanie M. Piech Lori E. Andrus |
|
Morrow, Morrow, Ryan
& Bassett Opelousas LA |
Patrick C. Morrow John Michael Morrow, Jr. |
|
Barrios, Kingsdorf
& Casteix, LLP New Orleans LA |
Dawn Barrios Bruce Kingsdorf |
|
Lundy & Davis Lake Charles LA |
Matthew Lundy Hunter Lundy |
|
Dué Caballero
Price Guidry Piedrahita & Andrews Baton Rouge LA |
Paul Dué Kirk A. Guidry |