Adams, et al v. USA, No. 4:2003cv00049 - Document 2121 (D. Idaho 2011)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denied in part and reserved in part 1990 Fifth MOTION for Summary Judgment Re Plaintiffs' Fraud, Assumed Duty & Other Claims filed by E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Company, Inc, 1931 First MOTION for Summar y Judgment re: Plaintiffs' Fraud, Assumed Duty and Other Claims filed by E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Company, Inc.; The motions are denied to the extent they seek to dismiss claims of plaintiffs Young, Sanders, Wada Potatoes, and Natures Best Produce, for their failure to plead their damages with specificity as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(g). They are reserved in all other respects not yet resolved by prior decisions. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by dks)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO TIMM ADAMS, et al., Case No. 4:CV 03-49-BLW Plaintiffs, v. MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE DUPONT S MOTIONS THAT YOUNG, SANDERS, WADA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants. POTATOES, AND NATURE S BEST FAILED TO PLEAD DAMAGES WITH SPECIFICITY MEMORANDUM DECISION The Court has before it that portion of DuPont s motion for summary judgment seeking to dismiss the claims of plaintiffs Young, Sanders, Wada Potatoes, and Nature s Best Produce, for their failure to plead their damages with specificity as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(g). The Court has filed a decision on this issue with regard to Fife Dairy that applies with equal strength to each of the plaintiffs listed above. See Memorandum Decision (Dkt. No. 2118). For example, Nature s Best seeks damages due to the reduced production value of potatoes from 2000 to 2009, plus the loss of future business opportunities. The Third Amended Complaint seeks loss of profits, loss of business, and loss of production, due to property or crop damage. That describes the damages sought by Nature s Best. In addition, more than a year ago, plaintiffs provided DuPont with Hofman s expert report detailing these damages. Also more than a year ago, DuPont questioned Nature s Best corporate representative Roy Young during his deposition about these very damages. A similar scenario played out for Memorandum Decision & Order - 1 each of the plaintiffs listed above. Just as the Court concluded in its decision concerning plaintiff Fife Dairy, it must also conclude here that plaintiffs have adequately pled their damages under Rule 9(g) and that there is no surprise to DuPont warranting dismissal of any claims under that Rule. ORDER In accordance with the Memorandum Decision set forth above, NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that DuPont s motions for summary judgment (docket nos. 1931 & 1990) are DENIED IN PART AND RESERVED IN PART. The motions are denied to the extent they seek to dismiss claims of plaintiffs Young, Sanders, Wada Potatoes, and Nature s Best Produce, for their failure to plead their damages with specificity as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(g). They are reserved in all other respects not yet resolved by prior decisions. DATED: October 7, 2011 Honorable B. Lynn Winmill Chief U. S. District Judge Memorandum Decision & Order - 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.