Salmonella Food Poisoning Lawyers Describe Evidence That Peanut Corporation and Parnell Engaged in Intentional, Dishonest and Fraudulent Acts, Distributing Salmonella Contaminated Peanut Butter Products in Chain of Commerce to Companies Incorporating the Peanuts and Peanut Butter Paste in 2000 Products Now the Subject of the Largest Food Poisoning Recall in U.S. History.

Our salmonella lawyers’ preliminary review of the available information confirms our earlier suspicions with regard to how the peanut products were contaminated with salmonella at the Plainview plant operated by Peanut Corporation of America. Additional information has been compiled from government agencies, including Texas officials and investigators though to testimony before Congress and the disclosure of PCA documents including e-mails from PCA operator Stewart Parnell. That information provides a more complete picture of the corruption of Parnell and the a conscious disregard of the health and lives of the consumers that characterized PCA, and Parnell in particular. The evidence compiled by our salmonella lawyers even just still at this very early stage in the investigation demonstrates that Parnell intentionally “let loose” on the public, “let loose” being Parnell’s ver batim instruction, salmonella poisoned peanut product delivered to food product manufacturers and distributed retailers and consumers throughout the United States.

As our salmonella food poisoning attorneys had previously speculated, from the open holes in the ceiling and openings in the physical perimeter of the plant, and from the known mechanisms of salmonella contamination, there was the likelihood that the cause of the salmonella contamination would probably turn out to be rat or bird excrement. Water draining off a roof into an area where it can contaminate food processing areas is a potent source of salmonella poisoning from bird excrement; and the Texas investigators who examined the plant found dead rodents and rat excrement located near the air exchange.

As early as 2006 the assistant manager of the plant, Kenneth Kendrick, sent numerous e-mails to the Texas health department complaining about the leaking roof, which he stated could be a contamination issue specifically because of bird excrement. “Anything nasty you can think of comes from water off a roof,” were Kendrick’s words.

Peanut Corporation of America was a low budget, cost cutting, peanut operation run from a converted garage outside Parnell’s Linchberg VA suburban home.

When tests of the Plainview Texas plant’s peanut butter product proved positive for salmonella contamination, Parnell attempted time and time againt to get around destroying the contaminated product, which is just the food industry standard requirement to protect the health of the consumer. Instead, Parnell would order plant managers to get new laboratory tests by sending samples to a different laboratories. In October, 2008, for example, when internal testing showed positive for salmonella Parnell not only ordered that a different lab retest the product, he complained about the delay: “The time lapse, besides the cost, is costing us huge $$$,” Parnell stated in an e-mail to his plant manager. In August 2008, when the Plainview plant peanut product returned test results positive for salmonella, Parnell obtained a negative result from another laboratory, and then sent an e-mail to the plant manager, “Okay, let’s turn them loose then,” referring to the very peanut products which had previously tested positive. According to memoranda and correspondence that was made a part of the public record at a Congressional hearing of the House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee, Peanut Corporation of America, through its subsidiary, also shipped out peanut products with a “homemade certificate” falsely attesting that they were contamination free.

If Peanut Corporation of America was solvent, our salmonella food poisoning lawyers would evaluate the case not only as satisfying the criteria for establishing liability for compensatory damage case, but as a good case of malice and conscious disregard for human life and health sufficient to justify punitive damages. Our investigation is ongoing in terms of whether the corporate shield may be pierced but Peanut Corporation of America has gone bankrupt and so the company itself may turn out to receive protection from punitive damages and may indeed have little in terms of insurance or assets to pay compensatory claims by those who suffered illness, let alone assets to pay punitive damages. The punishment of PCA and Parnell may have to be left to the criminal process, and criminal investigations are now underway. As our salmonella food poisoning lawyers explain elsewhere in our “Attorney Evaluation of Viability of Lawsuits Post PCA Bankruptcy,” we feel confident that the cases for compensation at least are still viable, including specifically because in food poisoning cases the victim can recover compensatory damages from all those in the “chain of commerce,” from the manufacturers to the distributors through to the retailer from whom the victim purchased the contaminated product.

By: Ray Henke, Esq.
Mr. Henke is a senior trial lawyers with the Salmonella Food Poisoning Law Group

By Ray Henke

Mr. Henke is a senior trial lawyer with the Food Poisoning Attorneys Law Group

Despite that Peanut Corporation of America filed Chapter 7 Bankruptcy on February 13, 2009, our Salmonella food poisoning lawyers consider that those suffering illness and the families of those who have passed away as the result of the salmonella contaminated peanut products will have ample opportunity to fully recover compensation for their injuries and damages, their medical expense and lost earnings.

The press has followed the Peanut Corporation of America bankruptcy and our Salmonella food poisoning lawyers consider that it is accurate, as others have suggested, that there may be little to recover from PCA or its subsidiary Plainview Peanut Company, which was the source of the salmonella outbreak that has resulted in hundreds of cases of illness and 9 confirmed deaths. However, our salmonella attorneys are informing those who have contracted salmonella poisoning that lawsuits may properly be filed against all the companies in the “chain of commerce,” from the raw product manufacturer, to the secondary manufacturers, of which there are over 2000 who have thus far recalled their products, to the distributors of those products through to the retailer from whom the product was purchased off the shelf.

Identifying the product, the manufacturer of the product, and the retailer, is the salmonella food poisoning lawyer’s first line of inquiry in ariving at the chain of commerce in any particular case. Our Salmonella lawyers provide on a List of 2000 Products Recalled as a part of our general discussion of the litigation, these product having been recalled because they contained peanut or peanut butter paste or product manufactured at the Peanut Corporation of America Plainview plant. In litigation “discovery” the PCA salmonella attorneys will identify the intermediate distributors are to fill out the full chain of commerce from the Plainview plant to the retailer. Any or all of those in the chain of commerce may be sued, which is a litigation strategy. Most commonly all will be brought together along with all or the majority of plaintiffs in multi-district litigation, or sometimes class actions. Salmonella food poisoning lawyers familiar with all of the potential litigation choices and capable of processing these varying types of lawsuits are generally best suited to advise their clients on their procedural options.

To complete our salmonella food poisoning lawyers analysis of the effect of Peanut Corporation of America’s bankruptcy, it is necessary to explain that the first obstacle to any recovery against PCA and its subsidiary, the Plainview Peanut Company, is the “automatic stay of bankruptcy.” The “stay” automatically halts in its tracks all ongoing litigation against the company. “Relief from the stay of bankruptcy” can be obtained from the bankruptcy court, and our Salmonella food poisoning lawyers have been successful in obtaining such relief from the stay of bankruptcy in several consolidated lawsuits, to permit the cases to go forward against the bankrupt to obtain judgments for damages that can be asserted in the bankruptcy proceedings. In some past cases our attorneys have not only obtained relief from the stay of bankruptcy to permit the civil lawsuits but have also filed affirmative lawsuits against the bankrupt in the bankruptcy court so that it would be possible to assert judgments against a bankrupt even following the bankruptcy, although the likelihood appears at the moment, that PCA will not survive bankruptcy. And the utility of such lawsuits may become secondary where there are ample assets and insurance to pay the claims among the others identified in the chain of commerce.

In summary, while there has been much discussion in the press with regard to Peanut Corporation of America’s bankruptcy, our salmonella food poisoning lawyers would hope that victims of the salmonella outbreak will not consider that they have no legal avenue to obtain compensation for their illness, the wrongful death of their loved one, and the other damages they have sustained. Our salmonella attorneys are certain that there will be ample assets and insurance among those identified in the chain of commerce to compensate all victims of this tragic national food poisoning outbreak.

Food poisoning lawyers serve their clients who have sustained serious illness, complications, and resulting permanent health consequences resulting from exposure to any of the large number of bacteria that may be found in a variety of foods, most commonly pre-cooked or ready-made foods such as luncheon meat or hot dogs, or green produce such as lettuce or spinach that may have been improperly processed or contaminated in packaging, or foods inadequately cooked at restaurants. Examples of the variety of bacteria that can result in serious food poisoning illness include Escheerichia coli O157:H7, commonly referred to as E coli or Ecoli, Listeria, Botulism, Campylobacter, Norovirus, Salmonella and Shigella.

These cases of bacterial illness can be presented to food poisoning lawyers as incidents of only a single infected individual or group of individuals exposed to the bacteria, as where they may consume the food at a family meal or restaurant; or food poisoning attorneys may be presented with hundreds of cases, where, for example, contaminated food, such as luncheon meat, or contaminated spinich or lettuce, is distributed in large quantities to grocery stores often across the country, in several states.

A discussion of all the many food poisoning illnesses and the food poisoning lawyers strategies for prosecuting the cases is necessarily beyond the scope of this article. What we will do below is discuss one common illness, Ecoli, and its serious consequences, Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, HUS, and Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura, TTP, and will discuss one recent outbreak of Ecoli poisoning from contaminated spinach, grown in California, largely distributed through a California company, repackaged into retail products by other food distributors and then sold at retail by grocery stores accross the country. For a more complete discussion of food poisoning illness, you may wish to consult Our California Food Poisoning Lawyers Discussion of Ecoli, Listeria, Botulism, Campylobacter, Norovirus, Salmonella and Shigella

Limiting here the discussion to the food poisoning lawyers approch to Ecoli illness and HUS and TTP cases, first, it is “Escherichia coli O157:H7″ which is commonly referred to by food poisoning lawyers as E. coli or Ecoli. Escherichia coli is a class of ordinary bacteria. The Ecoli bacterium is represented by hundreds of different “strains.” E coli is everywhere, indeed, it is present in the lower digestive tract of all humans and mammals. Indeed, the bacterium performs an important function in digestion, essential for human survival.

It is recognized by food poisoning lawyers and TTP and HUS attorneys that it is a specific strain of the E coli bacterium, Escherichia coli O157:H7 which results in the particular toxin which results in human illness, sometimes very serious illness, such as HUS and TTP. The alpha numeric designation, O157:H7, refers to the genetic markers on the surface of this particular strain of the bacterium, distinguishing it from the other benign Ecoli strains.

Exposure to Ecoli O157:H7 in foods can result in very serious illness, including Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, which food poisoning lawyers refer to as HUS. HUS can result in kidney failure and often can require kidney replacement or a lifetime on dialysis. Ecoli O157:H7 exposure can also result in Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura, commonly referred to by food poisoning lawyers as TTP, which in addition to kidney failure, can result in strokes and other serious neurological effects. Ecoli illness can also result in acute renal failure and death.

It is also recognized by food poisoning attorneys that there are a variety of food products that are most commonly contaminated with the deadly Ecoli strain, which include ground beef that may be undercooked at home or at a restaurant, salamis, milk or juice that is unpasturized, as well as lettuce, spinach, and sprouts. The most recent large outbreak of Ecoli illness of 2006 was found to result from contaminated California grown lettuce.

Large food poisoning outbreaks are investigated by the Centers for Disease Control, and the investigations conducted can provide invaluable evidence for use by food poisoning lawyers in the prosecution of outbreak cases. The CDC will interview those infected, identify the foods they ate which may be the common denominator, the common cause of the outbreak illness, and examine foods left over in refrigerators, or on the grocery store shelves, where available, to perform testing to identify this deadly strain of the bacterium.

The number of those infected will be disclosed by the CDC. From the CDC web site, as of September 24, 2006, it was recorded 173 individuals had been infected as the result of exposure to the California lettuce, involving Ecoli illness in 25 states, by reason of the nationwide distribution of the contaminated spinach.

To provide a sense of the seriousness of the 2006 Spinach Ecoli outbreak, the CDC data disclosed that 53 percent of those identified as having suffered Ecoli illness as the result of this one outbreak required hospitalization, another 16 percent contracted HUS, and one died. Most were children or the elderly, who are more susceptible to Ecoli infection.

Also helpful to food poisoning lawyers, in addition to the involved California farms, the CDC identified the principle distributor, Natural Selection Foods, LLC, of San Juan Bautista, California, as well as the secondary distributors, and retailers, permitting the attorneys to identify all potential defendants in the chain of commerce.

In individual food poisoning litigation the Ecoli HUS lawyers must conduct sometimes intensive investigation to identify the source of the exposure to the bacterium which caused the client’s illness. Some food poisoning lawyers will have taken the course in food management offered for those who want to become Certified Food Managers in order to supplement their knowledge and experience in complex litigation with education specific to food management. Food poisoning lawyers in outbreak cases and individual cases must also be trial lawyers, experienced in presenting the expert testimony to present both the “liability” case, and the “damages” case, in which the client’s illness, complications, sometimes debilitating health consequences, loss of enjoyment of life, past and future medical expenses and past and future loss of earnings resulting from the illness must be competently presented to assure that the client is fairly compensated.

Copyright 2007 Ray Henke
Principle trial attorney, California Personal Injury Attorneys & Food Poisoning Lawyers Law Group