Delaware Supreme Court hears case related to Mountaire settlement

The Delaware Supreme Court has taken under advisement a case brought by a member of the Mountaire class-action settlement against the attorneys who represented the class.

Oral arguments in the case were heard March 26 in Dover by a three-justice panel of the court comprising justices Karen Valihura, Abigail LeGrow and Christopher Griffiths. The panel itself could decide the case or it could determine that oral arguments need to be heard by all five justices.

The case dates back to April 2021, when Mountaire settled a class-action lawsuit brought by Millsboro residents whose groundwater was contaminated by failure of the wastewater treatment plant at Mountaire’s poultry processing plant. Between Delaware and federal court settlements, Mountaire was forced to pay $205 million. Of that, $65 million went to class members, $120 million went toward improvements to the wastewater treatment plant and $20 million went toward operations and maintenance.

As part of the settlement, members had the option to opt out of the payments, but if they did not, they would not be able to bring future action against Mountaire. According to court documents, after the opt-out period expired, the family of a child only identified as L.H., who was part of the class, retained attorney Thomas Crumplar and sought to proceed with direct legal action against Mountaire. L.H. had been born preterm and has suffered health problems since being born. The family claimed that those health problems had been brought on by nitrate ingestion caused by the Mountaire treatment plant failure during L.H.'s mother's pregnancy. 

The family was originally due to receive $2,500 as part of the settlement, and first sought to appeal their award, which was twice denied by the claims administrator for the class. Crumplar filed a claims package alleging the family was due to suffer economic losses between $8.6 million and $21.7 million. 

The family then moved to amend final approval of the class settlement, which was denied by Delaware Superior Court Judge Craig Karsnitz on the basis that it would have disrupted the whole class. However, Karsnitz asked the claims administrator to take another look at the family’s case. Despite additional physician and scientific evidence presented, the claims administrator, former Maryland Court of Appeals Judge Irma Raker, denied the appeal.

The family then moved to file a lawsuit alleging legal malpractice against the attorneys who negotiated the settlement: Chase Brockstedt, Phil Federico, Brent Ceryes and Stephen Spence. The family alleged the attorneys were negligent in failing to advise them to affirmatively opt out of the settlement and pursue an individual claim. The attorneys filed a motion to dismiss, stating the family could not definitively prove L.H.’s injuries were caused by Mountaire, and the family had a full and fair opportunity to appeal their award. 

The attorneys’ motion to dismiss was granted by Delaware Superior Court Judge Frances Jones, who ruled the family had multiple opportunities to have their case heard and were given the opportunity to supplement their case after Karsnitz allowed them a third hearing. The family appealed their case to the Delaware Supreme Court in September.

During the oral argument, Crumplar said the lawsuit was not an attack on the settlement or on the attorneys as representatives for the class. What the case is attacking is the attorneys’ representation of the family as individuals. Crumplar said the attorneys did not give the family any opportunity for discovery or provide adequate legal advice. He said their conduct amounted to negligence and malpractice, and he is asking for the Supreme Court to reverse the Superior Court’s decision and remand the case back to the lower court with instructions to deny the attorneys’ motion to dismiss. 

Josh Byrne, representing the attorneys, said a ruling in the plaintiffs’ favor would undermine the whole class-action system. He said the attorneys’ job was to represent all members of the class, even if it might go against the individual interest of some. Byrne said the plaintiffs had opportunities to opt out of the settlement if they so chose and are now looking for another bite at the apple.