Potatoes Direct Purchaser Antitrust Settlement

Class Members Eligible for Potatoes Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation Settlement:

All persons and entities who, between June 18, 2006 and June 17, 2015, directly purchased Fresh Potatoes grown in the United States, other than Specialty Potatoes, from: (1) any Defendant or any parent, subsidiary, or affiliate thereof; (2) any member of the cooperative members of United Potato Growers of America, or any parent, subsidiary, or affiliate thereof; any member of the United Potato Growers of Idaho, Inc., or any parent, subsidiary, or affiliate thereof; and (3) any entity that packed or marketed fresh potatoes grown by any Defendant, by any member of United Potato Growers of Idaho, Inc., or by any member of the cooperative members of United Potato Growers of America, Inc.

What Purchases are Eligible for the Potatoes Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation Settlement?

Purchases from Defendants and certain Non-Defendants are eligible.

Defendants, together with their past and present parents, subsidiaries and affiliates, are:

Albert T. Wada; Kim Wahlen;
Wada Farms, Inc.; KCW Farms, Inc.;
Wada Family, LLC; Lance Funk d/b/a Lance Funk Farms;
Wada Farms Potatoes, Inc.; Pleasant Valley Potato, Inc.;
Wada Farms Marketing Group, LLC; Potandon Produce L.L.C.;
Wada-Van Orden Potatoes, Inc.; Raybould Brothers Farms, LLC;
Pro Fresh LLC; Ronald D. Offutt Jr.;
Cedar Farms, LLC; RD Offutt, Co.;
Blaine Larsen Farms, Inc.; Rigby Produce, Inc.;
Cornelison Farms, Inc.; Snake River Plains Potatoes, Inc.;
Michael Cranney d/b/a/ Cranney Farms; United Potato Growers of America, Inc.;
Driscoll Potatoes, Inc.; United Potato Growers of Idaho, Inc.;
Idahoan Foods LLC; United II Potato Growers of Idaho, Inc.,

Purchases from Non-Defendants are also eligible if they were purchased from:

  • The members of the United Potato Growers of Idaho, identified in Exhibit D of the Settlement Agreement and attached as Attachment 1 to this Summary as well as purchases from those who packed or marketed potatoes grown by those members;
  • The members of the certain other potato membership organizations, identified in Exhibit B, C, and E of the Settlement Agreement and attached as Attachment 1 to this Summary, as well as purchases from those who packed or marketed potatoes grown by those members.

Potatoes Direct Purchaser Antitrust Settlement Case History:

In this lawsuit, Plaintiffs allege that, beginning in 2004, Defendants and others engaged in a conspiracy to fix, raise, maintain and/or stabilize the prices at which potatoes were sold in the United States by controlling and restricting the supply of potatoes. Plaintiffs claimed that Defendants and others implemented this price fixing and supply-management conspiracy by agreeing to take several coordinated actions including, among other methods, 1) agreeing to limit the number of acres planted to potatoes; 2) agreeing to destroy existing Fresh Potato stocks or divert Fresh Potatoes into processing; 3) and agreeing to limit the flow of Fresh Potatoes into the fresh market to stabilize or raise potato prices. Plaintiffs claim that Defendants’ actions violated the Sherman Antitrust Act, a federal law that prohibits any agreement that unreasonably restrains competition. Defendants have denied all of Plaintiffs’ claims and have asserted other defenses.

The Court has not decided which side was wrong or if any laws were violated. Instead, both sides agreed to settle the case and avoid the cost and risk of trial and appeals that would follow a trial. In this case, the settlement is the product of extensive negotiations. Settling this case allows class members to receive payments and other benefits now. The Class Plaintiffs and their lawyers believe the settlement is best for all class members.

In addition to monetary benefits, the defendants have agreed to entry of a “consent order” by the Court. If the Court approves the consent order, Defendants who are producers of potatoes and their cooperatives are prohibited from entering into any agreement setting the number of acres that any producer of potatoes will plant to Fresh Potatoes or otherwise setting the volume or amount of potatoes that any producer of Fresh Potatoes will plant or grow. Among other provisions, the consent order also requires that certain defendants that are membership organizations representing potato producers ensure that their members agree to the consent order, and requires Defendants will work with antitrust compliance counsel to review policies and procedures to make sure they are complying with antitrust laws.

Our Class Action Settlement Services:

CAC Recovery navigates the complex intricacies of the Potatoes Direct Purchaser Antitrust Settlement claims filing process to help businesses maximize their settlement recoveries.

 

Our class action settlement services include:

  • Identifying class action claims where businesses may be eligible to file
  • Filing the class action claim with supporting documentation
  • Interacting with the class action Claims Administrator
  • Providing updates on class action claim settlements status
  • Resolving Claims Administrator questions on claims
  • Reviewing the recovery to assure the correct compensation claims amount has been received

Our Guarantee: We Get Paid When You Recover – No hidden charges or up-front fees. We provide our class action settlements services based on a contingency fee.

Getting Started is easy! If you represent a business we’ll first have you fill out our Get Started form and a CAC representative will contact you within 24 hours to review your eligibility and walk you through the claims process.