Food Safety News editor Dan Flynn and reporter Dallas Carter, reported yesterday that The trial of the three former Peanut Corporation of America (PCA) executives that was to begin Monday morning is being delayed two weeks to give defense attorneys more time to review late-arriving documents from prosecutors.

Jury selection is now scheduled to begin July 28 for a trial likely to take about eight weeks. U.S. District Court Judge W. Louis Sands ordered the delay Friday after hearing defense motions to both dismiss all charges in the case and to postpone the trial.

At issue in Friday’s pre-trial hearing at the federal courthouse in Albany, GA, was the July 1 delivery of a computer file from the prosecution that contains an estimated 100,000 documents.

Defense attorneys said the information was useless to them because the volume of documents could not be adequately reviewed in the remaining time before trial. A range of “remedies” were available to Sands to resolve the issue, including dismissing the entire 76-count federal felony indictment.

The other two former PCA executives facing indictment are Michael Parnell, a former peanut broker, and Mary Wilkerson, quality control officer for the Blakely, GA, PCA plant. The Parnells are charged with fraud and conspiracy, along with placing misbranded and adulterated food into interstate commerce. Wilkerson is charged with obstruction of justice.

Two of the five original targets of a four-year investigation led by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agreed to plead guilty in exchange for consideration at sentencing, which won’t come until after the trial that could see both of them testify for the government. Both Daniel Kilgore and Samuel Lightsey were top PCA managers at Blakely, and both now await sentencing.

The criminal trial of Stewart and Michael Parnell, the former PCA chief executive officer and peanut broker for PCA, respectively and Mary Wilkerson, PCA’s former quality control manager is set to begin next Monday morning in Georgia.

The 2009 Salmonella outbreak that forms the basis of the criminal prosecution sickened 714 and killed nine.

Over the last five years there has been much focus on whether a prosecution would happen and perhaps less focus on the people behind the statistics.  I have not forgotten.

Clifford Frederick Tousignant (Cliff) was born in Duluth, Minnesota, in 1930, to Violet and Clifford Tousignant, Sr.  He was an adventurous and fearless young man, known for his introspective nature and generous heart.  At the age of 16, Cliff joined the Army in the Civil Air Patrol.  He loved the military and serving his country, a duty he maintained for 22 years.

During that time, he fought in the Korean War and earned three purple hearts.  The only thing Cliff loved more than his country was his family.  He had six children—Paul, Marshall, Susan, Calvin, Jane, and Lou, and eventually became a grandfather to fifteen children, and a great-grandfather to fourteen children.  As his family recalls, “He could often be seen with them crawling all over him.  He loved every minute of it and loved being in photos with them as well.”

In addition to his loving nature, Cliff was also known for his generosity.  One family story that is told often:

The night of his death I sat and spoke with my brother-in-law, Dan Herrick.  He shared a story with me.  When he and my sister, Jane, were first married, like many Americans times were tight.  My dad would make up reasons to come over and fix things that were never even broken.  He would give them money as a way to help them get by.  He helped out many of us over the years, including his own parents when he joined the army as a teenager.  As long as he had a few dollars in his pocket, he was willing to help others as best he could.

After leaving the armed forces, Cliff entered the security field, working for Frasier Shipyards in Superior, Wisconsin until his retirement.

When Cliff was diagnosed with diabetes, he took it seriously, and did his best to care for himself, but despite his best efforts he lost his right leg to the disease when it was amputated in 1985.  He also lost four toes on his left foot.  But ever the fighter, he did not let the loss of his leg and toes slow him down.  After he purchased a motorized wheelchair, Cliff was as mobile as ever.

For those who knew him best, Cliff could usually be found enjoying a good football game or sharing stories about his past experiences with friends.  As his brother, Robert, recalls, he was a “gentle, soft, loving person.  That’s not to say that he was a push-over.  Although he did not rile easily, when he did he could be very vocal.”  Cliff had no qualms about standing up for what he believed to be right.

The memories and stories of those he left behind after his untimely death are the only true way to explain what an extraordinary man, father, grandfather, brother, and friend Clifford Tousignant was to those who knew and loved him.  What follows are some of those family memories:

Continue Reading Remembering the Salmonella Victims of Stewart Parnell and PCA

Sunday, August 3, 2014: 6:00 PM-7:30 PM

500 Ballroom (Indiana Convention Center)

Ivan Parkin Lecture

William D. Marler – 
Marler Clark, LLP PS 
Seattle, Washington

20 Years Later, Where Were We, 
Where are We and Where are We Going?

Many would say that the 1992–1993 Jack in the Box E. coli O157:H7 outbreak was the beef and restaurant industries’ “911.” William “Bill” Marler was a young attorney in Seattle in the right place at a wrong time – right for an aggressive litigator, but wrong for the over 600 sickened, at least 50 with acute kidney failure and four deaths – all from doing the all American thing – eating a hamburger!

Mr. Marler is proud to give the Ivan Parkin Lecture in honor of those who were sickened and those who died. However, after over 20 years of being involved in every major foodborne illness outbreak that has occurred in the United States, Mr. Marler recognizes the major breakthroughs that have occurred in academics, government, but, most importantly, industry, in trying to make our food supply safer.

Mr. Marler will walk through the history of the Jack in the Box case and how it led to changes in how everyone viewed food safety. Although safer food has always been the goal, getting agreement on who is responsible and how to accomplish it has been a struggle.

In the end, however, professionals who showed a commitment to science and their craft have led a revolution to a safer food supply. Foodborne illness cases are down, outbreaks are down, but the commitment to make food safer remains the goal.

As illnesses and outbreaks fade, the challenge is to keep all – from farm-to-fork – focused on doing their jobs and not resting on the improving statistics.

All, I got the below email from the ABA – American Bar Association – yesterday.  If you think my blog fits the criterion, feel free to log in and say your piece – link is here.

We’re working on our annual list of the 100 best legal blogs, and we’d like your advice on which blogs you think we should include.

Use the form below to tell us about a blog—not your own—that you read regularly and think other lawyers should know about. If there is more than one blog you want to support, feel free to send us additional amici through the form. We may include some of the best comments in our Blawg 100 coverage. But keep your remarks pithy—you have a 500-character limit.

Friend-of-the-blawg briefs are due no later than 5 p.m. ET on Aug. 8, 2014.

About Blawg 100 Amici

Bloggers, by all means tell your readers about Blawg 100 Amici and invite them to send us messages on behalf of your blog.

But please know that we discourage amici from:

• Bloggers who nominate their own blogs or nominate blogs to which they have previously contributed posts.
• Employees of law firms who nominate blogs written by their co-workers.
• Public relations professionals in the employ of lawyers or law firms who nominate their clients’ blogs. 
• Pairs of bloggers who have clearly entered into a quid pro quo agreement to nominate each other. 

There is no specific criteria that a blogger can meet to be guaranteed a spot on the Blawg 100. And we think our list would suffer if there were. A blog’s whole can be greater than the sum of its parts, and a blog that never fails to post that daily update, has a beautiful design and an unwavering topical focus can very often have less of an impact than another blog that is less consistent on all fronts.

That said, please keep these criteria in mind when submitting Blawg 100 amici:

• We’re primarily interested in blogs in which the author is recognizable as someone working in a legal field or studying law in the vast majority of his or her posts.
• The blog should offer insights into the practice of law and be of interest to legal professionals or law students. 
• The majority of the blog’s content should be unique to the blog and not cross-posted or cut and pasted from other publications. 
• We are not interested in blogs that more or less exist to promote the author’s products and services.

Thanks for the consideration.  Again– link is here.

WSOC TV reports that Cabarrus and Mecklenburg county leaders said Papa John’s restaurant owes them money after they stepped in to help with a hepatitis A scare.

In April, a Papa John’s worker at the store’s Cambridge Commons Drive location had hepatitis A. After the discovery, Cabarrus and Mecklenburg counties vaccinated thousands of customers.

On May 20 Cabarrus County Health Alliance sent a certified letter to Papa John’s asking to be paid back, saying the vaccinations cost them $22,777.

WSOC anchor Scott Wickersham called Papa John’s corporate office in Kentucky on Tuesday. The restaurant claimed it never got that letter.

“While we have not yet received any formal request for reimbursement, Papa John’s will reimburse the county for all reasonable costs incurred in successfully responding to this incident,” said a company spokesman.

Reuter’s P.J. Huffstutter reported this evening that U.S. military bases and military commissaries in five states that supply food to personnel and their families are among the outlets believed to have received Salmonella Heidelberg-tainted chicken produced by Foster Farms, the USDA/FSIS said on Tuesday.

U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine bases in the states of Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada and Washington may have received the chicken, according to an updated list of recipients of the poultry that was recalled last week. The recalled products may have been sold to the bases themselves, as well as on-base commissaries, the agency said.

The Defense Department has awarded California-based Foster Poultry Farms with $190.4 million worth of contracts for poultry products from 2003 through 2012, according to the government procurement website USASpending.gov.

According to the CDC, as of July 2, 2014, a total of 621 persons infected with seven outbreak strains of Salmonella Heidelberg have been reported from 29 states and Puerto Rico, since March 1, 2013.

Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada and Washington all received the Foster Farms chicken and have illnesses linked to the product.  It is unclear at this time if members of the military or their families are any of the 621 counted as ill.

Two months ago Foster Farms filed suit against Orkin pest control for allegedly failing to control cockroaches at one Foster Farms processing plant. The FSIS suspended operations at that Foster Farms plant because the bugs were found on four occasions.  The finding of the cockroaches resulted in a three-day shutdown of the plant in January 2014.

According to the lawsuit, Orkin entered a contract with Foster Farms in May 2013 to control pests at the Livingston facility. Foster Farms claims the exterminators did substandard work.  The lawsuit alleges Orkin did not cooperate with Foster Farms and the FSIS to deal with the infestation. The suit also claims that Orkin failed to provide six-days-a-week service promised in the contract, instead often coming only three days a week.

Foster Farms is seeking unspecified damages from Orkin for lost profits, property damage, business disruptions and fumigation costs.

Interestingly, as Foster Farms recalled chicken due to Salmonella illnesses, it also filed suit seeking to compel XL Insurance and Lloyd’s of London to cover $14 million in losses it sustained when the FSIS inspection found the cockroaches in Livingston – forcing it to shut its doors and destroy 1.3 million pounds of product.  In the complaint Foster Poultry Farms Inc. alleges the insurers wrongfully denied it coverage for its $14 million in losses, including lost profits, increased operating costs and expenses associated with customer shortages.

According to the complaint, Foster Farms held a product contamination policy with the two insurers under which they agreed to pay it for loss arising out of insured events. Accidental contamination, government recalls and product extortion are covered under the policy.

In addition to lost profits, Foster also incurred expenses related to fumigation services and costs associated with the destruction and disposal of adulterated products.

Hmm, sounds a bit like double-dipping to me?

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Iowa is asking people who were sickened by eggs produced by Quality Egg, LLC between about the beginning of 2010 and August 2010 to contact their office.

On June 3, 2014, Quality Egg, LLC (also known as Wright County Egg) and two company officials pled guilty to a misdemeanor charge of introducing adulterated eggs into interstate commerce. The charge resulted from Quality Egg, LLC’s sale of eggs contaminated with Salmonella Enteriditis between about the beginning of 2010 and August 2010.

Anyone who was sickened during this time period from eggs distributed by Quality Egg, LLC is asked to visit the website for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Iowa, at: www.justice.gov/usao/ian or to contact Shari Konarske, Victim-Witness Coordinator, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Iowa at (319) 363-6333 or at shari.konarske@usdoj.gov.

On July 4, 2014, the CDC reported a total of 621 individuals infected with the outbreak strains of Salmonella Heidelberg from 29 states and Puerto Rico. Most of the ill persons (76%) have been reported from California.  The number of ill persons identified in each state is as follows:

Alabama (1), Alaska (1), Arkansas (1), Arizona (25), California (480), Colorado (9), Connecticut (1), Delaware (1), Florida (4), Georgia (1), Hawaii (1), Idaho (5), Illinois (1), Kentucky (1), Louisiana (1), Michigan (4), Missouri (5), Montana (1), North Carolina (1), Nevada (11), New Mexico (2), Oregon (17), Puerto Rico (1), Tennessee (1), Texas (13), Utah (6), Virginia (4), Washington (20), West Virginia (1), and Wisconsin (1).

36% of ill persons have been hospitalized, and no deaths have been reported.

Epidemiologic, laboratory, and traceback investigations conducted by local, state, and federal officials indicate that consumption of Foster Farms brand chicken is the likely source of this outbreak of Salmonella Heidelberg infections.

Outbreak began in February 2013 with last reported illness June 25, 2014.

Read the Federal Meat Inspection Act for yourself and decide.

Title 21 – FOOD AND DRUGS – CHAPTER 12 – MEAT INSPECTION – SUBCHAPTER I – INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS; ADULTERATION AND MISBRANDING – Sec. 601 – Definitions

As used in this chapter, except as otherwise specified, the following terms shall have the meanings stated below:

…

(m) The term “adulterated” shall apply to any carcass, part thereof, meat or meat food product under one or more of the following circumstances:

(1) if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health; but in case the substance is not an added substance, such article shall not be considered adulterated under this clause if the quantity of such substance in or on such article does not ordinarily render it injurious to health;

(2)(A) if it bears or contains (by reason of administration of any substance to the live animal or otherwise) any added poisonous or added deleterious substance (other than one which is (i) a pesticide chemical in or on a raw agricultural commodity; (ii) a food additive; or (iii) a color additive) which may, in the judgment of the Secretary, make such article unfit for human food;

…

(4) if it has been prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, or whereby it may have been rendered injurious to health;