Judge will allow cancer statistics from other counties in litter trial
Posted on Saturday, August 12, 2006
Washington County Circuit Judge Kim Smith said Thursday he will allow defendants to present evidence of cancer statistics in other poultry-producing counties at the Sept. 5 trial of plaintiffs who claim arsenic in chicken litter has caused cancer in the Prairie Grove area.
The issue was just one of the matters discussed Thursday when lawyers for defendants Alpharma Inc. and Alpharma Animal Health Company and plaintiffs argued pretrial motions in preparation for the first trial in a suit with several plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs in the Sept. 5 trial are Michael and Mary Green and their son, Blu, who was a minor when he suffered from leukemia.
They and others listed in the first of eight lawsuits to be tried in Washington County Circuit Court allege roxarsone, distributed by Alpharma, and Alpharma Animal Health Inc., and fed to chickens, has caused high arsenic levels spread after litter degrades, resulting in cancer.
Their complaints center on the Prairie Grove area.
Alpharma attorneys state that plaintiffs premise the motion to exclude the evidence in other poultryproducing counties on their claim that statistics are misleading and prejudicial because there "is no evidence that the poultry is being fed roxarsone; there is no evidence of the location that the poultry litter is being spread."
But, defendants' lawyers claim, this directly contradicts claims in the suit that broiler chickens are fed roxarsone, that litter containing roxarsone is spread in the areas surrounding these chicken farms, and that area residents are exposed to the litter, causing illnesses.
In allowing defendants'evidence of cancer statistics in the other counties, Smith said, he would also allow plaintiffs to bring in evidence about all cancers besides leukemia if the defendants broach this subject.
The judge also denied the plaintiffs' motion about alternative sources of arsenic in the Prairie Grove area. Plaintiffs have argued that defendants should be kept from offering evidence about arsenic sources other than poultry litter. Some of the sources listed by defendants include exposure to second-hand smoke, diesel fuel emissions and historical use of lead arsenate on apple orchards.
Plaintiffs' attorney Hunter Lundy argued that the defendants "just want to throw out suggestions of what could be causing this. "He said doctors for the plaintiffs have ruled out other potential causes of plaintiffs' cancers.
In ruling for defendants, however, Smith said that whether other sources caused the cancers will be up to the jury to decide, and defendants have a right to bring them up at trial.
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
