DuPont settles Hawaii growers' lawsuit

DuPont settles Hawaii growers' lawsuit

	Published : Thu, 26 Apr 2007 03:08 By : Agencies Print this Story

HONOLULU (AP) - Six Hawaii nursery operators who claimed a contaminated fungicide made by DuPont Co. damaged their crops have settled their lawsuit against the chemical giant, lawyers said Wednesday.

The two sides reached the settlement Tuesday, one day before U.S. District Judge Susan Oki Mollway in Honolulu was set to start jury selection for a trial.

Warren Price, a Honolulu-based lawyer for DuPont, said he couldn't disclose terms of the agreement.

'It was very much of a win-win. We are glad it's resolved,' Price told The Associated Press.

Stephen Cox, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, told The Honolulu Advertiser his clients also were pleased with the amount.

'It was a good business decision for everyone concerned,' said Cox, of San Francisco.

The six growers, plant and ornamental flower farmers from Oahu and the Big Island, were seeking as much as $30 million if the case had gone to trial.

The case dates back to 1994, when the Hawaii growers settled with DuPont for a combined $10 million in product liability cases.

Afterward, the farmers said they learned the company withheld evidence of widespread contamination of Benlate with the herbicide sulfonylureas. So the growers sued DuPont again.

DuPont had challenged the Hawaii growers' right to file the lawsuit and appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. But the nation's top justices last June refused to hear the appeal, clearing the way for the lawsuit to go forward.

DuPont began manufacturing Benlate in the 1950s but decided to halt production in 2001 in the face of mounting crop damage claims. The company has paid more than $1 billion in settlements and legal fees on claims associated with Benlate.

The six Hawaii growers include former state Sen. David Matsuura and his brother, Stephen Matsuura, along with Mueller Horticultural Partners and Fuku-Bonsai Inc.

Cox said his clients were seeking the difference between the $10 million original settlement and the fair amount of a settlement had the withheld evidence been disclosed, he said.