Pilgrim's Pride fails in bid to move rendering plant suit to federal court

For the second time, an attempt to transfer a suit challenging a proposal by Pilgrim’s Pride to build a rendering plant on Gadsden Airport Authority property to federal court has failed.

U.S. District Judge Corey Maze on Monday directed that the lawsuit filed by Dynamic Collision, a business adjoining the proposed location, and later joined by more than 20 owners of property near the site against Pilgrim’s Pride, the City of Gadsden and the Gadsden Airport Authority, challenging the proposal on zoning grounds, be remanded to Etowah County Circuit Court.

Recently: Gadsden Airport Authority commended for vote against Pilgrim's Pride rendering plant proposal

Pilgrim’s Pride had sought the move to federal court, contending that there was federal jurisdiction over at least one of Dynamic Collision’s claims.

The City of Gadsden earlier this year tried a similar move, contending that one of Dynamic Collision’s claims — that the proposed plant violated existing zoning ordinances, which denied Dynamic’s procedural due process rights — was being brought under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Maze quashed that request as well, ruling that Dynamic Collision had brought its due process claim under state law.

“The federal court quickly recognized this is a local matter that needs to be resolved in Etowah County and sent the case back to where it belongs,” said Christie Knowles, attorney for the plaintiffs. “We are reviewing options on how to move this matter toward finalization now that we have the case back in Etowah County."

Opposition: Etowah County, Rainbow City and Southside will seek injunction to block rendering plant

A Pilgrim's Pride spokesman contacted by email said the company had no comment on the ruling.

The move by Pilgrim’s Pride followed the issuance of a temporary restraining order by Circuit Judge George Day on Nov. 17, barring the GAA from signing agreements or taking any action to allow the use of the property at the Northeast Alabama Regional Airport on Steele Station Road for the construction or operation of a rendering plant, or to sell, deed or lease it for that purpose.

Day in his ruling cited a restrictive covenant in the 1947 deed that conveyed the airport property from the federal government to Gadsden, nothing that it “shall be used for public airport purposes, and only for such purposes,” and specifically bars its use “for manufacturing or industrial purposes.”

Votes: The Gadsden Airport Authority votes to reject Pilgrim's Pride, Etowah Community proposals

Dynamic Collision then amended its complaint to seek declaratory and injunctive relief based on the 1947 deed’s requirement for the property’s use and a provision in a 2004 deed from Gadsden to the GAA conveying the property “subject to all easements, conditions, and restrictions of record … in deeds from the United States of America to the City of Gadsden.”

The plaintiffs also now contend that the GAA can’t sell or lease property to Pilgrim’s under Alabama Code 4-3-49, which is what they say gave the city the right to convey the airport property to the GAA.

A hearing on a preliminary injunction was scheduled for Dec. 1, but that was postponed after Pilgrim’s Pride filed its motion to shift the case to federal court.

The company acknowledged that Dynamic Collision hadn’t asserted a federal cause of action, according to Maze’s ruling, but said the case raised two issues it contends fall under federal jurisdiction: whether subsequent amendments to the Surplus Property Act of 1944 (that removed the ban on using such property for industrial purposes) nullify the 1947 deed restrictions, and whether the Federal Aviation Administration will close the airport or revoke grants if the GAA sells the property for a rendering plant.

Pilgrim’s Pride cited Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & Mfg., a 1994 U.S. Supreme Court decision which established that a state case could be moved to federal court when there’s a substantial and disputed federal question, and the balance between the federal and state judiciaries wouldn’t be threatened.

Maze rejected those assertions, stating that they basically were irrelevant to Dynamic Collision’s claims and didn’t meet the criteria for the court to exercise federal question jurisdiction over state law claims: that they must (1) necessarily raise a stated federal issue, (2) that is actually disputed and (3) substantial, which (4) a federal forum may entertain without disturbing any congressionally approved balance of federal and state judicial responsibilities.

Frustration mounts: Cynthia Toles lashes out at rendering plant opponents: 'Stay out of Gadsden's business'

“At its core, this case turns on whether the Airport Authority’s property is an appropriate location for a chicken rendering plant,” Maze wrote. “The answer to that question depends on interpreting Gadsden zoning ordinances and the restrictive covenants in the Airport Authority’s deed. How to best allocate the use of land within its municipalities is of special concern to the State of Alabama. It is of little interest to this federal court, which must almost always defer to the zoning decisions of state and municipal officers.”

The GAA on Friday voted not to sell property to either Pilgrim’s Pride for a rendering plant or to Etowah Community, a local group that offered a competing plan to develop an industrial park at the airport site.

Dynamic Collision’s suit remains scheduled to go to trial the week of Jan. 3 in Day’s court.

Remand by USA TODAY Network on Scribd

This article originally appeared on The Gadsden Times: Rendering plant case sent back to Etowah Circuit Court