Gatlin, et al. v. Sanderson Farms, Inc.
| Docket Number: | 2005-CA-01056-SCT Linked Case(s): 2005-CA-01056-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-08-2007 Opinion Author: Graves, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Breach of contract - Termination of contract Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Carlson, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ. Dissenting Author : Diaz and Easley, JJ. Procedural History: JNOV Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CONTRACT |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-23-2004 Appealed from: Jones County Circuit Court Judge: Billy Joe Landrum Disposition: Jury returned a verdict in favor of Sanderson that Gatlin had breached the terms of his contract with Sanderson Farms. Case Number: 99-150-CV9 |
|
| Note: | Motion to Take Judicial Notice filed by the appellants is denied. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | ROY R. GATLIN AND NELDA T. GATLIN |
JOHN DUDLEY BUTLER
LAWRENCE E. ABERNATHY, III |
||
| Appellee: | SANDERSON FARMS, INC. | RYAN JEFFREY MITCHELL RICHARD O. BURSON |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Breach of contract - Termination of contract |
| Summary of the Facts: | Roy Gatlin and Sanderson Farms Inc. entered into a contract whereby Sanderson would deliver baby broiler chicks to Gatlin to raise in chicken houses on his property. In 1997, the Gatlin farm had a high mortality rate apparently due to e-coli, “spiking disease,” and other infections. After receiving complaints of illegal disposal, a Sanderson inspector found the skeletal remains and feathers of numerous chickens scattered in a thicket on Gatlin’s property. Gatlin admitted that he dumped the carcasses in violation of both his contract and the regulations of the Mississippi Board of Animal Health. Sanderson immediately terminated Gatlin’s contract. Gatlin sued Sanderson for breach of contract. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Sanderson, and Gatlin appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Gatlin argues that Sanderson breached its contract with Gatlin by immediately terminating him for allegedly violating the law when he had not been found in violation by the Board of Animal Health. Gatlin also argues that Sanderson had a duty to exhaust other contractual remedies involving Farm Management Deficiencies pursuant to the Broiler Growing Program. The contract or Broiler Production Agreement in this matter specifically states the terms of the contract and the parties involved. Attached to the Agreement is a document entitled “Broiler Growing Program –Overview,” which includes provisions on Culling and Dead Bird Disposal and Evaluation Procedures, including Farm Management Deficiencies. However, there are no such provisions in the Broiler Production Agreement. The Broiler Production Agreement clearly states that the Agreement is controlling in the case of a conflict between the two documents. The Agreement includes language as to the disposal of dead birds and the grounds for termination. Therefore, Sanderson had the right to immediately terminate the contract. While it may be unfortunate for Gatlin, the contract does not include any language stating that only the Mississippi Board of Animal Health or some other administrative, regulatory or law enforcement agency, can determine whether the grower has failed to comply with applicable federal, state, or local laws or regulations. Thus, the jury properly found that Gatlin was in breach of contract and that Sanderson properly terminated the contract. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
