Class-Action Lawsuit Against Monsanto Is Dismissed

Originally posted by Maluhia
reply to post by charles1952

 

"Your Honor, make it so Monsanto can't sue us if their seed gets into our fields." "Have they sued you? Have they started to sue you? Have they said they will sue you?" "No"

Judge: Have they set a precedent for suing organic farmers from which you feel you need protection?

Yes, your honor.

Yeah, I thought they had.

Not a lawyer, but I think this would come under an "injunction" or in terms of "legal relief." You can ask the courts to send Monsanto a "cease and desist" or be in contempt of court.

Originally posted by jrod
reply to post by VoidHawk

 

Simply boycotting Monsanto will not greatly hurt them. They have massive government contracts all over the world, there is no way of telling(at least they won't tell us) what crops are from Monsanto seeds, there is no way of keeping their corn out of the ethanol supply that is used in our automobiles, and the are the beneficiaries of an obscene amount government subsidies.

Like I posted before, simply boycotting Monsanto will not destroy them.

Yeah, boycotts really don't work for the big behemoths. If you boycott some food company -- you will likely miss the dozen odd other company names they sell under. Many of the names are barely shell companies. And a LOT OF our organic foods are now coming from homey-sounding companies that are owned by the same corporations we've been trying to avoid.

I've heard a lot of like-minded Progressives ask for a "day of boycott" where nobody works and we all stay home. But my utility bill goes to the biggest polluter in the USA (The Southern Company). I pay a private shell company for my natural gas 5 times what I used to pay when it was state run (none of them actually have people who connect the service -- they contract the same employees who used to work for the state company). I HAVE TO pay insurance. Most of the fees and expenses that really drive my life are necessities.

In this topsy turvy world -- it's the luxury items that are cheap. The REQUIRED expenses we cannot get out of, will bankrupt you if you aren't careful.

Hardly a surprise but still disgusting how corrupt the system is. Wonder what it is like to work for Satan and know you are just one of his disposable minions?

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

The REQUIRED expenses we cannot get out of, will bankrupt you if you aren't careful.

Oh, how very true! And they keep coming up with more and more of them.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst


I wasnt suggesting we try to make a stand in anyway, I was simply suggesting we stop using them and use non toxic alternatives. Though I do see I didnt make that obvious

I see people buying chemical sprays to "Keep surfaces germ free"
I'd prefer to be chemical free, chemicals frighten me far more than germs. Hot soapy water used to be good enough but now its got to be -
"New Super Strength Kill Everything Spray"

It makes me laugh when I see people breathing in the chemical spray while they congratulate themselves for doing such a good job killing the imaginary bug eyed germ monster

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

Dear VitriolAndAngst,

Good thinking, nice post. I like people who are creative and who are willing to explore options.

The injunction would work if Monsanto had been abusing the system. By that I mean filing frivolous suits, or suits that had harassment as their only purpose, and it was reasonable to expect they would do it again. For instance, that Orly Taitz women who filed over and over on the burth certificate issue. At least one court has told her not to show up with that claim ever again.

Monsanto? Sure they're jerks, no problem there. And I don't know their record in court, but if they've won a lot of their cases, then they weren't frivolous suits. A court would probably be unwilling to tell them you can't bring a suit like that ever again. Access to the courts is important and judges don't like to shut that off except in severe cases.

But I like your thinking. If Monsanto has a history of abusing the system, there might be something that could be done. Bleeding a little guy, just doesn't qualify. But the farmers might want to go for a jury trial if they ever are sued. There would be a lot of sympathy.

With respect,
Charles1952

Well i know whos backround im looking into tonight.

edit:first thing that pops out at me is she has a track record of being extremely biased against the plaintiff
im not finding too much else though wish i could find a history of rulings or something

reply to post by sirhumperdink

I noticed that too. If you find anything else interesting, please come back and post it.