Opinion ID: 408097
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Foremost Dairy.

Text: 133 The evidence relating to NFO's attempted 1971 sale to Foremost Dairy clearly demonstrates the cumulative effect of coercive conduct by Mid-Am and AMPI. 134 Foremost had a facility in Springfield, which was supplied by Mid-Am, and one in Dallas, which was supplied by AMPI and at various times in part by independents. The Springfield facility is not at issue in the 1970-1971 time frame. Foremost's dealings with AMPI at its Dallas plant are another matter. The principal Foremost witness, James Rudy, testified to certain confrontations with AMPI over Foremost's periodic purchases of independent, non-AMPI milk-incidents involving two AMPI staff members, Joe Murphy and J. G. Anderson. Murphy is the undisputed author of a 1969 memorandum to superiors recommending that AMPI engage in short-shipping of Foremost and another dairy in order to resolve the nonmember, independent purchase problem. 36 135 Rudy's testimony and contemporaneous memoranda indicate that Foremost experienced short-shipping by AMPI in 1969, and that Anderson of AMPI threatened similar conduct in 1970, both times-in Foremost's view-due to independent purchases by Foremost. AMPI concedes a brief interruption in its supply to Foremost in 1969, AMPI Br. at 42, but denies any threat in 1970. The person who is alleged to have made the 1970 threat, however, testified only that when he learned Foremost would make certain independent purchases, he told Rudy, I was disappointed they were going to and that I hated to lose those sales, but he could not recall saying anything else. 136 This is the background against which Foremost's March, 1971, rejection of NFO milk must be viewed. NFO's offer to Foremost involved a shipment assembled for Beatrice which was cancelled by Beatrice, as noted above, about two weeks after Mid-Am's suit was filed against Beatrice. NFO offered it to Foremost, in what Rudy characterized as a rather desperate manner. Upon receiving the offer, Rudy contacted Beatrice to ascertain why they were cancelling the shipment, and was told about the Mid-Am litigation and certain problems with the market administrator. 37 Rudy indicated that he was told that all they (Beatrice) had tried to do was to buy the milk and they ended up involved in litigation and they decided it was in their best interest to discontinue purchasing the milk. Rudy then contacted NFO and turned down the milk, indicating the Springfield facility was adequately supplied by Mid-Am; and that with respect to the Dallas plant, he was not ready to take the plunge by buying NFO milk. Rudy stated that to take the plunge meant risking possible new confrontations with AMPI similar to the 1969 and 1970 incidents noted above; but he also indicated that the primary consideration involved the legal implications. 137 The arguments of Mid-Am and AMPI on this incident confirm NFO's complaint. AMPI emphasizes that it never discussed the 1971 NFO shipment with Foremost, pointing to Rudy's testimony that his decision was independent and objective and that no one from AMPI told him to reject the NFO milk. AMPI also underscores the role of Mid-Am's litigation against Beatrice as a factor in Rudy's decision, notwithstanding Rudy's stated concern over possible retaliation from AMPI. AMPI Br. at 43, 44 n.45. Mid-Am, on the other hand, argues that Rudy's decision was based solely upon his discussion with Beatrice and not upon anything Mid-Am said or did. Mid-Am Br. at 56. It is clear that neither AMPI nor Mid-Am directly threatened Foremost concerning the 1971 NFO shipment. It is equally clear that Foremost's objective decision to reject that shipment was pervaded by Mid-Am's litigation tactics against buyers of NFO milk and AMPI's prior reprisals for independent purchases. The only real dispute in the record is over which of these factors was more dominant in Foremost's decision. 138 Viewed in the larger context of the overall conduct engaged in by these co-ops, the Foremost incident gives rise to only one conclusion: NFO was caught in a whipsaw created by the coercive conduct of AMPI and Mid-Am toward buyers of independent milk in general, and of NFO milk in particular. 139