Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Tostrud denies the chicken processor's motion for summary judgment in its suit seeking a finding that Minnesota statutes and rules establishing parent-organization liability for the unmet obligations of their subsidiaries under certain agricultural contracts are not applicable to its contracts with Minnesota chicken growers. He grants the growers' motion for summary judgment. A choice-of-law clause does not not bind the processor to Minnesota law on its own, but Minnesota's choice-of-law principles otherwise favor applying Minnesota law to the growers' claims against the processor. Minnesota's parent-liability rules and statutes also do not violate the dormant Commerce Clause. The laws and rules therefore apply. The growers' motion for leave to amend their counterclaims is denied, since the proposed amendments are largely unnecessary in light of this and other orders.