Buljic v. Tyson Foods, Inc., No. 21-1010 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Plaintiffs, relatives of individuals who worked at the Tyson Foods pork processing facility that contracted COVID-19 and later died, filed suit alleging claims for fraudulent misrepresentation and gross negligence. Plaintiffs contend that Tyson's actions in March and April of 2020 caused their relatives' deaths. Tyson removed the cases to federal court and then the district court remanded to state court.
The Eighth Circuit affirmed and concluded that Tyson has failed to show that it was performing a basic governmental task or operating pursuant to a federal directive in March and April of 2020. Therefore, Tyson was not acting under a federal officer at the time that plaintiffs' relatives contracted COVID-19 and is not eligible for removal under the federal officer removal statute. The court also concluded that Tyson has abandoned the federal question argument concerning removal by failing to brief it, either in its initial brief or by supplemental brief, after the Supreme Court decided BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 141 S.Ct. 1532 (2021), permitting alternative arguments against remand to be raised.
Court Description: [Kelly, Author, with Erickson and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Civil case - COVID-19. Plaintiffs' decedents worked at Tyson's Waterloo, Iowa plant and died of complications from COVID; in this state court action, they alleged Tyson failed to take adequate steps to protect workers from spread of the disease at the plant; Tyson removed the case to federal court, claiming its actions were taken at the direction of federal officer and that it had a colorable federal defense under the federal officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1442(a)(1); Tyson also contended the plaintiffs' suit raised substantial and disputed issues of law under the Defense Production Act; plaintiffs moved to remand to state court, and the district court granted the motion, concluding neither ground for removal was established. Held, the district court did not err in remanding the case, as Tyson failed to show it was performing a basic governmental task or operating pursuant to federal directive in March and April of 2020; it was not acting under a federal officer and could not use the federal removal statute to remove the case; further, Tyson has abandoned the federal question argument concerning removal by failing to brief it, either in its initial brief or by supplemental brief, after the Supreme Court decided BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 141 S.Ct. 1532 (2021) permitting alternative arguments against remand to be raised. [ December 29, 2021 ]
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.