Potash Price-Fixing Conspiracy Alleged
Recent Cases
The world's leading potash suppliers conspired to fix U.S. prices on the fertilizer, Gage's Fertilizer & Grain claims in a federal antitrust class action. It claims they did this after potash prices tanked in the 1990s because "potash producers, particularly those located in the former Soviet Union, increased the supply of potash in world markets".
A similar antitrust class action was filed in Minneapolis Federal Court by Minn-Chem Inc.
Gage's claim in Chicago states, "As part of, and in furtherance of, this conspiracy, defendants exchanged sensitive, non-public information about prices, capacity, sales volumes, and demand; allocated market shares, customers, and volumes to be sold; and coordinated on output, including the limitation of production."
During the class period, July 1, 2003 until today, "defendants sold millions of tons of potash in the United States."
Potash is, or are, mineral and chemical salts that contain potassium, a necessary nutrient for plants. "There is no cost-effective substitute for potash," the complaint states.
"Potash is mined from naturally occurring ore deposits that were formed when seas and oceans evaporated, many of which are now covered with several thousand feet of earth. ...
"Belarus, Canada, Germany, Israel, Jordan and Russia have about 90% of the global potash supply within their borders," the complaint states. "Over half of the world's global capacity is located in just two regions - Canada and the former Soviet Union, specifically Russia and Belarus."
Here are the defendants: Agrium Inc., Agrium US Inc., Mosaic Co., Mosaic Crop Nutrition LLC, Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan Inc., PCS Sales (USA) Inc., JSC Uralkali, RUE PA Belaruskali, RU PA Belarussian Potash Co., BPC Chicago LLC, JSC Silvinit, and JSC International Potash Co.
Plaintiffs are represented by Steven Hart with Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney.
Related listings
-
Nevada Sex Laws Tossed
Recent Cases 09/12/2008Nevada's new sex-offender laws are unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled Wednesday. U.S. District Judge James Mahan made permanent the temporary injunction he issued in July that stopped the state from applying the new laws retroactively. The new l...
-
2nd Circuit Won't Change NY's Apportionment Method
Recent Cases 09/11/2008The 2nd Circuit denied a voter's assertion that New York's method of congressional district apportionment should be changed from overall population to voting-age population. Michael Kalson sued Gov. David Paterson and the state election board. Kalson...
-
'Rear Window' Copyright Holder Sues Spielberg & Viacom
Recent Cases 09/09/2008Steven Spielberg, Dreamworks and Viacom stole the copyrighted story on which the Hitchcock film "Rear Window" was based and used it as the basis for their movie, "Disturbia," the copyright holder claims in Federal Court. Hitchcock based his movie on ...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.