There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Poultry companies ask judge to dismiss ruling that they polluted an Oklahoma watershed

Arkansas-based Tyson Foods, Minnesota-based Cargill Inc. and the others say in a motion filed Thursday that evidence in the case is now more than 13 years old.

“This case is constitutionally moot because the Court can no longer grant any effectual relief,” the companies argued in a filing with U.S. District Judge Gregory Frizzell in Tulsa.

magnetosphere , (edited )
@magnetosphere@kbin.social avatar

The filing said Oklahoma conservation officials have noted a steady decline in pollution. It credited improved wastewater treatment plants…

Who paid for those treatment plants? The taxpayers, I assume. Shut the fuck up and pay them back.

Frizzell had ordered the poultry companies and the state to reach an agreement on how to remedy the effects of the pollution.

Attorneys for the companies and the state attorney general each said in Thursday filings that mediation had failed.

I don’t see a state attorney general just giving up in this type of situation. So, the companies were so stubborn that they walked out of mediation, thereby violating a court order? And now they want to be rewarded with a dismissal? They can blow me.

Thann ,
@Thann@lemmy.ml avatar

I don’t see a state attorney general just giving up in this type of situation.

I see a campaign contribution in his future

blazera ,
@blazera@kbin.social avatar

love that justice goes so slowly for the wealthy that they get away with crimes because it took too long.

Jaysyn ,
@Jaysyn@kbin.social avatar

That literally doesn't matter. I like how desperate this makes them look though.

magnetosphere ,
@magnetosphere@kbin.social avatar

“We ran out the clock, so that means we win! Football rules work in court, right?”

macaro ,

What are the odds that the evidence is old because regulators/the companies delayed discovery?

snowe ,
@snowe@programming.dev avatar

So if you read the article the court case actually ended 13 years ago, the judge just never ruled on it. So it’s not even that the evidence is old (I mean it is, but that’s clearly not the reason here). There was a delay in the actual ruling after the case concluded. Really really strange.

magnetosphere ,
@magnetosphere@kbin.social avatar

I guess somebody’s bribery check bounced.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •