ALDF v. Provimi Veal Corp. case brief summary

ALDF v. Provimi Veal Corp.

US District Court, District of Massachusetts, 1986

626 F. Supp. 278

 

Topic: A sampling of Animal Law - Commercial Uses of Animals

 

Parties           

ALDF of Boston is bringing a suit against Provimi Veal Corp. of Wisconsin (buys cows raised by others in MA and slaughters and sells them). Removed to federal court b/c of diversity jurisdiction.

Procedure

 

Issue   

Whether It is unfair to deny consumers information that they may find useful when purchasing their food. Bringing these claims under MA consumer protection statute.

 

Facts  

Provimi is not providing warning labels on its product that the cows are treated with antibiotics and as well as the manner in which they are raised. 

           

            How are the calves raised: 

                    ○ Limited to standing up/sitting down, in crates

                    ○ Deprived iron in their diet

 

Analysis

Preemption:

In this case, law does not say it is preempted, but if you look at the FDCA and FMIA the federal law is intending to occupy entire field of law

           

Failure to state a claim:

Private organization does not have the authority to bring a claim of animal cruelty, this is the power of the state's enforcement. State has to delegate that authority.

           

ALDF agrees that they can't enforce it, but as consumers, they have a right to know how the calves are raised and Provimi has a duty to tell them how you raise your calves. This is a consumer protection issue. 

 

Result

Judgment on the pleadings granted on both claims.

 

Side note:

Provimi filed for motion of judgment on the pleadings

  

○ Claims
§ ALDF has failed to state a cause of action
§ Federal law preempts state law
□ Preemption has to do with the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution
□ Constitution shall be the supreme law of the land
□ Only if there is an intent to preempt it - if they are intended to occupy an entire field of law

                                   

Ways you might have preemption:
1. Says in the statute
2. Comprehensive scheme/plan (looks like they intended to occupy an entire field of law)
3. Fed and state scheme are in conflict

                                   

Did ALDF lose? 

They did not get the labels on the beef, but do we really believe that they are 1) eating beef and 2) that they didn't know how the calves were raised?

 

What was their real objective?

They wanted to bring this issue (the manner in which calves are raised) to the light.

Court calls it cruel, they lose legally, but maybe they really won.

 

Is this appropriate to bring lawsuits for political reasons?

If you can't get it done with legislation, why shouldn't you get to use the court system. Brown v. Board of Education

 

The purpose of the court system is not to make new laws, that is the purpose of the legislation.