5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 1 of 15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`
`

`

`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 2 of 15
`
`STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
`
`COUNTY OF CALHOUN
`
`FORREST E. CRIDER,
`
`
`IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE
`
`FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
`2020-CP-__–_____
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`
`
` )
`Plaintiff,
`)
`SUMMONS
`)
`(JURY TRIAL REQUESTED)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`vs.
`
`PILGRIM’S PRIDE CORPORATION, HOG
`SLAT INCORPORATED, AGFIRST FARM
`CREDIT BANK, and AGSOUTH FARM
`CREDIT ACA,
`
`
`Defendants
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TO THE DEFENDANTS ABOVE-NAMED:
`
`
`
`YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and are required to answer the Complaint in this
`
`action, a copy of which is herewith served upon you, and to serve a copy of your Answer upon the
`
`subscribers at 720 South Shelmore Boulevard, Suite 100, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, 29464
`
`within thirty (30) days after the service thereof, exclusive of the day of such service, and if you
`
`fail to answer the Complaint within the time aforesaid, judgment by default will be rendered
`
`against you for the relief demanded in the Complaint.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mount Pleasant, South Carolina
`May 13, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SEGUI LAW FIRM, PC
`
`s/Abigail Y. Bechtol
`Phillip W. Segui, Jr.
`S.C. Bar Number: 7029
`Abigail Y. Bechtol
`S.C. Bar Number: 102414
`720 S. Shelmore Blvd., Suite 100
`Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
`(843) 884-1865
`psegui@seguilawfirm.com
`abechtol@seguilawfirm.com
`
`

`

`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 3 of 15
`
`STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
`
`COUNTY OF CALHOUN
`
`FORREST E. CRIDER,
`
`
`IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE
`
`FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
`2020-CP-__–_____
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`
`
` )
`Plaintiff,
`)
`COMPLAINT
`)
`(JURY TRIAL REQUESTED)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`vs.
`
`PILGRIM’S PRIDE CORPORATION, HOG
`SLAT INCORPORATED, AGFIRST FARM
`CREDIT BANK, and AGSOUTH FARM
`CREDIT ACA,
`
`
`Defendants
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NOW COMES the Plaintiff above-named, complaining of the Defendants above-named,
`
`who alleges and shows unto this Honorable Court as follows:
`
`PARTIES
`
`
`
`1.
`
`The Plaintiff, Forrest E. Crider, is an individual residing in Calhoun County, State
`
`of South Carolina, and previously owned and operated the poultry farm located at 181 Center Hill
`
`Road, Saint Matthews, South Carolina until approximately June 2019.
`
`
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation (hereinafter
`
`“Pilgrim’s Pride”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware
`
`conducting business in Calhoun County, State of South Carolina, and at all times relevant herein
`
`was engaged in the production of poultry for mass consumption.
`
`
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Hog Slat Incorporated (hereinafter “Hog
`
`Slat”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of North Carolina
`
`conducting business in Calhoun County, State of South Carolina, and at all times relevant herein
`
`provided and installed materials and equipment to Plaintiff in the operation of Plaintiff’s poultry
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 4 of 15
`
`farm.
`
`
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant AgFirst Farm Credit Bank (hereinafter
`
`“AgFirst”) is headquartered and domiciled in the State of South Carolina conducting business in
`
`Calhoun County, State of South Carolina, and at all times relevant herein was engaged in the
`
`lending of money to Plaintiff for operation of his poultry farm.
`
`
`
`5.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant AgSouth Farm Credit ACA (hereinafter
`
`“AgSouth”) is headquartered and domiciled in the State of Georgia conducting business in
`
`Calhoun County, State of South Carolina, and at all times relevant herein was engaged in the
`
`lending of money to Plaintiff for operation of his poultry farm.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter hereto and that the
`
`
`
`6.
`
`allegations out of which this action arises all involve the operations of Plaintiff’s poultry farm
`
`located in Calhoun County, State of South Carolina.
`
`7.
`
`Venue is proper because one or more Defendants maintain business facilities, have
`
`agents, transact business, and otherwise operate within Calhoun County. Further, the unlawful acts
`
`alleged herein were performed and had effects within Calhoun County.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`
`
`
`
`8.
`
`“Broilers” (young chickens bred for meat) account for nearly all domestic chicken
`
`consumption. Their production is concentrated into networks of production, dominated by
`
`vertically-integrated poultry companies known as “Integrators.” Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride is one
`
`such Integrator.
`
`
`
`9.
`
`Integrators such as Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride control every aspect of broiler
`
`
`-2-
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 5 of 15
`
`production except the care and raising of the birds themselves. For the care of the birds from
`
`hatching until the broilers reach slaughtering age, Integrators contract with individual poultry
`
`farmers known as “Growers” via agreements known as “poultry growing agreements” or “broiler
`
`production agreements.” Integrators require exclusivity, and Growers are not permitted to provide
`
`services to other Integrators for any reason.
`
`
`
`10. While the Integrators provide to their Growers the birds themselves, feed,
`
`veterinary services, and supervision, the Growers are responsible for labor, utilities, maintenance,
`
`and the up-front costs required to construct the large houses (“grow-out facilities”) in which the
`
`broilers grow until they reach appropriate age. Because of the substantial start-up costs (usually in
`
`the form of vast debts) required for a Grower to enter the poultry growing business, Growers are
`
`effectively beholden to the wishes of their Integrators.
`
`11.
`
`Integrators have the most power over Growers laden with debt from building or
`
`upgrading their houses. Thus, Integrators are keenly aware of Growers’ debt burdens, and require
`
`them to undertake unnecessary and expensive upgrades to their facilities to prevent financial
`
`independence.
`
`12.
`
`Plaintiff owned and operated a poultry farm containing four (4) poultry houses
`
`located at 181 Center Hill Road, Saint Matthews, South Carolina on his family’s land beginning
`
`in approximately 2007.
`
`
`
`13.
`
`Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth lent Plaintiff approximately one million, two
`
`hundred thousand dollars ($1,200,000.00) to construct said poultry houses on Plaintiff’s land in
`
`approximately 2007.
`
`
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride via letter of intent
`
`
`-3-
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 6 of 15
`
`and oral agreements with representatives of Defendants Pilgrim’s Pride on June 8, 2018
`
`(hereinafter “contract”) under which Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride would provide poultry birds to
`
`Plaintiff to grow if Plaintiff undertook various upgrades and repairs. Specifically, the Letter of
`
`Intent stated in part:
`
`This Letter of Intent . . . shall convey the purpose of both Pilgrim’s and Independent
`Grower to enter into a Broiler Production Agreement, upon the securing of financing and
`updating of four (4) houses to grow chickens in accordance with specifications provided
`by Pilgrim’s. House specifications shall meet “Premium” standards, with the stipulation
`that the grower meet “Premium Plus” standards within a year from the date the Broiler
`Production Agreement is signed.
`
`15. Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride made representations to Plaintiff that Defendant
`
`Pilgrim’s Pride would assist Plaintiff with resolving certain perceived inadequacies.
`
`
`
`
`
`16.
`
`Plaintiff subsequently undertook said upgrades and repairs.
`
`17.
`
`That, in conjunction with upgrades and repairs required by Defendant Pilgrim’s
`
`Pride, Defendant Hog Slat provided and installed various materials and equipment at Plaintiff’s
`
`poultry houses.
`
`
`
`18.
`
`Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth instructed Plaintiff to use Defendant Hog Slat due
`
`to Defendant Hog Slat’s relationship with Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride.
`
`
`
`19.
`
`The materials and equipment installed by Defendant Hog Slat were installed
`
`improperly and subsequently failed, requiring repair by Plaintiff in order to meet the requirements
`
`imposed by Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride.
`
`
`
`20.
`
`During this time, Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth made representations to
`
`Plaintiff that they would lend him money for purchase of items not related to Plaintiff’s poultry
`
`houses – i.e. thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.00) for purchase of a tractor – but would not lend
`
`him appropriate funds to finance repairs and upgrades to poultry houses themselves required by
`
`-4-
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 7 of 15
`
`Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride.
`
`
`
`21.
`
`After Plaintiff completed repairs and upgrades required by Defendant Pilgrim’s
`
`Pride, Defendant Pilgrim’s improperly refused to provide Plaintiff with birds pursuant to the
`
`existing contract and continued to unilaterally impose additional requirements for repairs,
`
`modifications, and upgrades not originally contemplated.
`
`22.
`
`Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride subsequently communicated to Plaintiff that it would
`
`provide birds to Plaintiff’s poultry farm only if the farm was owned by someone other than
`
`Plaintiff.
`
`
`
`23.
`
`Aforesaid actions forced Plaintiff to sell his poultry farm, including four poultry
`
`houses and sixteen (16) acres of land that has been in Plaintiff’s family for over two hundred (200)
`
`years.
`
`24. As a result of the Defendants’ actions, Plaintiff has been damaged and has expended
`
`large sums of money to undertake repairs and upgrades in reliance on representations made by
`
`Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride and to address improper installation of materials and equipment by
`
`Defendant Hog Slat. Additionally, Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride’s breach of contract resulted in
`
`Plaintiff being forced to sell his poultry farm for several hundred thousand dollars less than its true
`
`market value via a “fire sale” due to financial distress brought about by Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride.
`
`Collusive actions by Defendants Pilgrim’s Pride, AgFirst Farm, and AgSouth placed Plaintiff in a
`
`financial hardship and required him to include in the sale of his property equipment and land not
`
`originally provided as collateral for Plaintiff’s loans on the property. Further, actions by
`
`Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth played a material role in the breach of contract by Defendant
`
`Pilgrim’s. Finally, negligence by Defendant Hog Slat damaged the Plaintiff such that he was
`
`
`-5-
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 8 of 15
`
`required to expend his own money to repair the faulty materials and equipment installed by
`
`Defendant Hog Slat. All Defendants’ actions violated this state’s Unfair Trade Practices Act.
`
`FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
`(Breach of Contract)
`(AS TO DEFENDANT PILGRIM’S PRIDE CORPORATION)
`
`The Plaintiff re-alleges the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 24 above
`
`25.
`
`as if fully set forth verbatim.
`
`26.
`
`At all times relevant herein, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant
`
`Pilgrim’s Pride to execute a Broiler Production Agreement to grow chickens in Plaintiff’s poultry
`
`houses located in Saint Matthews, South Carolina.
`
`27.
`
`At all times relevant herein, Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride had an obligation and duty
`
`to provide birds for Plaintiff’s poultry farm upon Plaintiff’s completion of necessary upgrades and
`
`repairs.
`
`28.
`
`Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride breached its contract with Plaintiff by refusing to enter
`
`into a Broiler Production Agreement and provide birds for Plaintiff’s poultry farm after Plaintiff
`
`complied with requirements set forth by Defendants Pilgrim’s Pride.
`
`29.
`
`As a result of Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride’s breach of its contract with the Plaintiff,
`
`Plaintiff has been damaged and has expended large sums of money to undertake repairs and
`
`upgrades in reliance on representations made by Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride. Additionally,
`
`Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride’s breach of contract resulted in Plaintiff being forced to sell his poultry
`
`farm for several hundred thousand dollars less than its true market value.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-6-
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 9 of 15
`
`FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
`(Fraudulent Misrepresentation)
`(AS TO DEFENDANT PILGRIM’S PRIDE CORPORATION)
`
`The Plaintiff re-alleges the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 29 above
`
`
`
`
`
`30.
`
`as if fully set forth verbatim.
`
`
`
`31.
`
`Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride falsely represented to Plaintiff that it would enter into a
`
`growing agreement and provide Plaintiff birds to grow if Plaintiff undertook a certain set of repairs
`
`and upgrades.
`
`
`
`32.
`
`Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride’s representations were material to Plaintiff’s agreement
`
`and completion of repairs and upgrades to Plaintiff’s poultry farm.
`
`
`
`33.
`
`Statements made after the fact indicate Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride knew the
`
`representations made to Plaintiff were false.
`
`
`
`34.
`
`Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride
`
`intended for Plaintiff
`
`to act upon
`
`the false
`
`misrepresentations.
`
`
`
`35.
`
`Plaintiff was unaware that representations made by Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride were
`
`false at the time they were made.
`
`
`
`36.
`
`Plaintiff had a right to and did rely upon Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride’s false
`
`representations.
`
`
`
`37.
`
`As a proximate result of Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride’s false representations made to
`
`the Plaintiff, Plaintiff has been damaged and has expended large sums of money to undertake
`
`repairs and upgrades in reliance on representations made by Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride.
`
`Additionally, Defendant Pilgrim’s breach of contract resulted in Plaintiff being forced to sell his
`
`poultry farm for several hundred thousand dollars less than its true market value.
`
`
`-7-
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 10 of 15
`
`FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
`(Tortious Interference with Contract)
`(AS TO DEFENDANTS AGFIRST FARM CREDIT BANK AND AGSOUTH FARM
`CREDIT ACA)
`
`The Plaintiff re-alleges the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 37 above
`
`38.
`
`
`
`as if fully set forth verbatim.
`
`
`
`
`
`39.
`
`40.
`
`The Plaintiff had a valid contract with Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride.
`
`Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth had knowledge of Plaintiff’s contract with
`
`Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride.
`
`
`
`41.
`
`Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth intentionally and without justification withheld
`
`from Plaintiff funds needed in order to make the repairs and upgrades to his poultry houses required
`
`by Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride.
`
`42.
`
`Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth intentionally and without justification required
`
`Plaintiff to utilize the services and products of Defendant Hog Slat who negligently installed
`
`heaters and other equipment resulting in further requirements imposed by Defendant Pilgrim’s
`
`Pride.
`
`
`
`43.
`
`As a proximate cause of Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth’s actions, Plaintiff has
`
`been damaged and has expended large sums of his own money to undertake repairs and upgrades
`
`required by Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride. Additionally, Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth’s tortious
`
`interference with contract resulted in Plaintiff being forced to sell his poultry farm for several
`
`hundred thousand dollars less than its true market value.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-8-
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 11 of 15
`
`FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`(Civil Conspiracy)
`(AS TO DEFENDANTS PILGRIM’S PRIDE CORPORATION, AGFIRST FARM
`CREDIT BANK, AND AGSOUTH FARM CREDIT ACA)
`
`The Plaintiff re-alleges the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 43 above
`
`44.
`
`
`
`as if fully set forth verbatim.
`
`
`
`45.
`
`The Defendants, Pilgrim’s Pride, AgFirst, and AgSouth, engaged in a civil
`
`conspiracy for the purpose of depriving Plaintiff of land, equipment, and livelihood and to prevent
`
`Plaintiff’s financial independence.
`
`
`
`46.
`
`Plaintiff expended his own funds to undertake repairs, modifications, and upgrades
`
`to his poultry houses pursuant to requirements by Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride so that Defendant
`
`Pilgrim’s Pride would place birds in his houses pursuant to their agreement, placing himself in a
`
`financially precarious position created by Defendants Pilgrim’s Pride, AgFirst, and AgSouth.
`
`47.
`
`After Plaintiff completed repairs, modifications, and upgrades to his poultry
`
`houses, Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride continued to place upon Plaintiff requirements to undertake
`
`additional repairs, modifications, and upgrades not originally contemplated by their agreement.
`
`48. Meanwhile, Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth refused to lend Plaintiff funds to
`
`make any repairs, modifications, and upgrades without Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride’s placement of
`
`birds in Plaintiff’s poultry houses. This effectively placed Plaintiff in a “Catch-22” situation in
`
`which Defendant Pilgrim’s Pride would not place birds in Plaintiff’s houses without the
`
`completion of required upgrades and modifications, and Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth would
`
`not lend Plaintiff money to complete the required upgrades and modifications until birds had been
`
`placed in Plaintiff’s houses.
`
`
`
`49.
`
`Defendants AgFirst and AgSouth represented to Plaintiff that they would lend him
`
`-9-
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 12 of 15
`
`money to purchase items unrelated to the repair, modification, upgrade, and operation of his
`
`poultry farm, but refused to lend Plaintiff funds to meet the requirements of Defendant Pilgrim’s
`
`Pride so birds could be placed in Plaintiff’s houses.
`
`
`
`50.
`
`The Defendants conspired to place Plaintiff in this position for the purpose of
`
`preventing Plaintiff’s financial independence, forcing Plaintiff to include in the sale of his farm
`
`equipment and land not originally contemplated as collateral for his loan(s).
`
`
`
`51.
`
`Plaintiff has been damaged by being forced to sell his farm for several hundred
`
`thousand dollars less than its true market value and by being required to include in the sale of the
`
`property items such as equipment and land that were not originally offered or provided as collateral
`
`for Plaintiff’s loan to construct his poultry houses.
`
`FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`(Negligence, Gross Negligence, Carelessness, Recklessness, Willfulness, and Wantonness)
`(AS TO DEFENDANT HOG SLAT INCORPORATED)
`
`The Plaintiff re-alleges the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 51 above
`
`52.
`
`as if fully set forth verbatim.
`
`53.
`
`The Defendant, Hog Slat, by and by and through its agents, servants, and
`
`employees, undertook and was under a duty to repair and/or install equipment to Plaintiff’s poultry
`
`houses and to provide materials and services in accordance with applicable building codes,
`
`manufacturers’ recommendations, in conformance with accepted industry standards and practices,
`
`and in accordance with all requirements imposed by the laws and statutes of the State of South
`
`Carolina.
`
`54.
`
`The Defendant, Hog Slat, was negligent, grossly negligent, careless, reckless,
`
`willful, and wanton in constructing and repairing the apartment homes and buildings. Such
`
`
`-10-
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 13 of 15
`
`negligence, gross negligence, carelessness, recklessness, willfulness, and wantonness includes but
`
`is not limited to the following particulars, to-wit:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`a.
`b.
`
`c.
`d.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`In improperly installing heaters in Plaintiff’s poultry houses;
`In failing to use due care in the installation and operation of heaters in
`Plaintiff’s poultry houses;
`In improperly installing other equipment in Plaintiff’s poultry houses;
`In failing to act as a reasonable person would in circumstances then and
`there prevailing;
`In failing to properly supervise the installation of equipment in Plaintiff’s
`poultry houses; and
`Other deficiencies or failures as will be proven at trial.
`
`
`
`55.
`
`As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, gross negligence, carelessness,
`
`recklessness, willfulness, and wantonness of Defendant Hog Slat, Plaintiff has been damaged and
`
`has expended large sums of money to undertake repairs to remedy the improper installation of
`
`various equipment by Defendant Hog Slat. As a further result of this improper equipment
`
`installation, Plaintiff has been forced to sell his poultry farm for several hundred thousand dollars
`
`less than its true market value.
`
`FOR A SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`(Unfair Trade Practices)
`(AS TO ALL DEFENDANTS)
`
`The Plaintiff re-alleges the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 55 above
`
`
`
`56.
`
`as if fully set forth verbatim.
`
`
`
`57.
`
` The Defendants are “persons” within the meaning of South Carolina Code §39-5-
`
`10(a).
`
`
`
`58.
`
`The Defendants by their actions are engaged in commerce within the meaning of
`
`South Carolina Code §39-5-10(b).
`
`59.
`
`The Defendants’ action(s) described hereinabove, constitute unfair and deceptive
`
`
`-11-
`
`

`

`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 14 of 15
`
`practices within the meaning of South Carolina Code §39-5-20(a).
`
`
`
`60.
`
`The Defendants’ act(s) are capable of repetition and, upon information and belief
`
`and in accord with the allegations herein, have been repeated.
`
`
`
`
`
`61.
`
`62.
`
`The Defendants’ conduct affects the public interest of the people of South Carolina.
`
`The Defendants knew or should have reasonably known that their conduct violated
`
`the Unfair Trade Practices Act.
`
`
`
`63.
`
` As a proximate result of Defendants’ unfair trade practices, Plaintiff has been
`
`damaged and has expended large sums of money to undertake repairs and upgrades to his poultry
`
`farms. Additionally, Defendants’ unfair trade practices have resulted in Plaintiff being forced to
`
`sell his poultry farm for several hundred thousand dollars less than its true market value.
`
`RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff respectfully prays for a judgment against the Defendants,
`
`Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation, Hog Slat Incorporated, AgFirst Farm Credit Bank, and AgSouth Farm
`
`Credit ACA, in a reasonable amount of actual, punitive, and treble damages to be determined by a
`
`jury, for the costs of this action and attorney’s fees, for pre-judgment and post-judgment interest
`
`on the Plaintiff’s damages, and for such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and
`
`appropriate.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[signature to follow]
`
`
`-12-
`
`

`

`5:20-cv-02279-JMC Date Filed 06/16/20 Entry Number 1-1 Page 15 of 15
`
`ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 May 13 1:57 PM - CALHOUN - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2020CP0900093
`
`
`
`SEGUI LAW FIRM, PC
`
`
`s/ Abigail Y. Bechtol
`Phillip W. Segui, Jr.
`S.C. Bar Number: 7029
`Abigail Y. Bechtol
`S.C. Bar Number: 102414
`720 S. Shelmore Blvd., Suite 100
`Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
`(843) 884-1865
`psegui@seguilawfirm.com
`abechtol@seguilawfirm.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-13-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mount Pleasant, South Carolina
`May 13, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`