The massive litigation over Syngenta Corp.’s Viptera corn now includes a class action lawsuit on behalf of all those alleging they were indirectly harmed by Syngenta’s actions even without directly dealing in Viptera corn.

According to this Syngenta corn class action lawsuit, in 2009 Syngenta introduced a new type of pest-resistant genetically engineered corn known as MIR162. This strain was introduced in two separate generations known respectively as “Agrisure Viptera” and “Agrisure Duracade.” Syngenta applied to the Chinese government in March 2010 for approval to import MIR162 into China. While waiting for Chinese approval, the company continued to market MIR162 to growers. Then, in November 2013, Chinese officials discovered traces of MIR162 in a shipment of U.S. corn to China, and they responded by banning all imports of U.S. corn, not just MIR162.

The proposed class representative, plaintiff Richard G., is a corn farmer from Marion, Ky. Richard is actually not a Syngenta MIR162 customer. He says he makes a point of buying only non-genetically modified corn seed or genetically modified corn seed that has been approved for import by all major corn importing countries. The basis of Richard’s claim is the allegation that Syngenta’s actions regarding the MIR162 strain caused enormous financial losses for those in the corn industry who deal in all other types of corn.

Richard now alleges that the loss of the Chinese market for U.S. corn caused a catastrophic drop in the price of corn that affected the entire corn industry, including those industry members who never dealt in MIR162 corn. He maintains that Syngenta should be on the hook for those losses.

Aggravating Syngenta’s liability, according to Richard, is the representations the company made to the corn industry assuring them over and over that Chinese approval of MIR162 was sure to happen and that it would be granted soon.

The Proposed Classes

Richard proposes to represent a “Nationwide Class” consisting of “[a]ll persons and entities that grew, harvested, and sold non-MIR162 corn on a commercial basis (or who received revenue from or such corn under a crop-share agreement) from November 2013 to the present.” He further proposes to represent the members of that class located in Kentucky as a “Kentucky Subclass.”

Richard’s first cause of action against Syngenta is for violation of the Lanham Act. The Lanham Act is a federal law that in general prohibits the dissemination of false or misleading information about goods or services, and it allows those who may be harmed by such misinformation to bring a civil action for damages. Richard’s other causes of action include public nuisance, trespass to chattels, common law negligence, strict liability for products liability, strict liability for failure to warn, and tortuous interference with prospective business relationships.

In addition to seeking an award of monetary damages, Richard is asking the court to temporarily enjoin Syngenta from marketing, selling or distributing Viptera and Duracade corn. He also wants the court to order Syngenta to remediate its alleged contamination of the U.S. corn supply.

Richard’s Syngenta corn class action lawsuit is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky.