In re Syngenta AG Mir 162 Corn Litig., Case Nos. MDL 2591
| Court | United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Kansas |
| Citation | 131 F.Supp.3d 1177 |
| Docket Number | Case Nos. MDL 2591,14–MD–2591–JWL. |
| Parties | In re SYNGENTA AG MIR 162 CORN LITIGATION. This Document Relates To All Cases. |
| Decision Date | 11 September 2015 |
131 F.Supp.3d 1177
In re SYNGENTA AG MIR 162 CORN LITIGATION.
This Document Relates To All Cases.
Case Nos. MDL 2591
14–MD–2591–JWL.
United States District Court, D. Kansas.
Signed Sept. 11, 2015.
131 F.Supp.3d 1183
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, District Judge.
| Table of Contents |
|---|
| Summary of Ruling | 1185 |
| Background | 1186 |
| Governing Standards | 1187 |
| Choice of Law | 1188 |
| Analysis | 1188 |
| I. | Duty | 1188 |
| II. | Proximate Cause | 1193 |
| III. | Economic Loss Doctrine | 1193 |
| IV. | FIFRA Preemption | 1207 |
| V. | Claims Based on Duracade/Event 5307 | 1208 |
| VI. | Trespass to Chattels | 1209 |
| A. | Intermeddling | 1209 |
| B. | Contact with Producer Plaintiffs' Corn | 1211 |
| C. | Damage | 1212 |
| D. | Intent | 1212 |
| VII. | Private Nuisance | 1212 |
| A. | Syngenta's Participation in the Invasion | 1212 |
| B. | Invasion of Plaintiffs' Land | 1215 |
| C. | Unreasonable Invasion | 1216 |
| VIII. | Tortious Interference with Business Expectancy | 1217 |
| A. | Identification of Relationships | 1217 |
| B. | Intent | 1218 |
| C. | Improper Means | 1218 |
| D. | Termination of Relationship | 1219 |
| IX. | Trans Coastal's Claim for Negligent Interference | 1219 |
| A. | Improper Means | 1220 |
| B. | Duty of Care | 1220 |
| X. | Lanham Act Claims | 1221 |
| A. | Standing—Fairly Traceable/Proximate Cause | 1221 |
| B. | Statutory Standing—Within the Zone of Interests | 1222 |
| C. | "Commercial Advertising or Promotion" | 1224 |
| D. | Forward–Looking Statements | 1224 |
| XI. | Trans Coastal's Misrepresentation Claims | 1227 |
| A. | Fraud Claims | 1227 |
| B. | Negligent Misrepresentation Claims | 1228 |
To continue reading
Request your trial
50 cases
-
In re Dicamba Herbicides Litig., MDL No. 2820
...who is hoodwinked into purchasing a disappointing product." Id. at 132, 134 S.Ct. 1377. In re Syngenta AG MIR 162 Corn Litig. , 131 F.Supp.3d 1177, 1222 (D. Kan. 2015), is instructive. In that case, the plaintiffs were farmers who did not purchase the defendant's genetically modified ("GM")......
-
Johannessohn v. Polaris Indus., Inc.
...the Minnesota legislature did not specify that it is intended to apply outside Minnesota. See In re Syngenta AG MIR 162 Corn Litig. , 131 F. Supp. 3d 1177, 1232–33 (D. Kan. 2015) (concluding MCFA "may be applied in this case only to conduct taking place in Minnesota" where plaintiffs did no......
-
In re Syngenta AG Mir 162 Corn Litig. Classes Certified By the Court
...that such claim is based on a lack of warnings in materials accompanying the products." See In re Syngenta AG MIR 162 Corn Litig. , 131 F.Supp.3d 1177, 1208 (D. Kan. 2015). Syngenta now seeks summary judgment on any other failure-to-warn claim asserted by plaintiffs. Plaintiffs respond that......
-
Suez Water N.Y. Inc. v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.
...after they were in the ownership and control of Westinghouse. See id. at 613.10 Likewise, in In re Syngenta AG MIR 162 Corn Litig. , 131 F. Supp. 3d 1177 (D. Kan. 2015), the United States District Court for the District of Kansas dismissed a private-nuisance claim brought against a manufact......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
Economic loss rule
...in the detailed September 2015 Memorandum and Order of U.S. District Judge John W. Lungstrum [ In re Syngenta AG MIR 162 Corn Litig. , 131 F.Supp.3d 1177, 1193-1208 (D. Kan. 2015)], the ruling focuses at length on the law of 22 states to distinguish between those states’ treatment of “econo......