John Doe I v. Nestle, USA

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 10, 201510-56739California6,434 words

Opinion

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOHN DOE I; JOHN DOE II; No. 10-56739 JOHN DOE III, individually and on behalf of proposed D.C. No. class members; GLOBAL 2:05-CV-05133-SVW-

EXCHANGE, JTL

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v. ORDER AND

AMENDED ORDER

NESTLE USA, INC.; ARCHER

DANIELS MIDLAND

COMPANY; CARGILL

INCORPORATED COMPANY;

CARGILL COCOA,

Defendants-Appellees.

Filed May 6, 2015 Amended June 10, 2015

Before: Dorothy W. Nelson, Kim McLane Wardlaw, and Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Circuit Judges.

Order; Amended Order; Dissent by Judge Bea SUMMARY*

Alien Tort Statute

The panel denied a petition for panel rehearing and, on behalf of the court, a petition for rehearing en banc.

Dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc, Judge Bea, joined by Judges O’Scannlain, Gould, Tallman, Bybee, Callahan, M. Smith, and N.R. Smith, wrote that the panel majority had substituted sympathy for legal analysis in concluding that the defendant corporations engaged in the Ivory Coast cocoa trade with the purpose that the plaintiffs be…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.