The $36 million award handed down by a Multnomah County, Ore. circuit court jury as damages for defective fertilizer used on blueberry plants being grown at a nursery and destroying them by the millions is believed to be one of the largest product liability ever awarded a Canadian company. Earlier this month the jury decided that the fertilizer produced by SunGro Horticulture, which has U.S. and Canadian operations, was responsible for the loss at J.R.T. Nurseries and damage to the company’s business reputation which had been built up for over 20 years.
Another nursery, DeZwaan Nurseries in Pitt Meadows, B.C., which had a crop of Japanese maple trees destroyed, was awarded the much smaller amount of $241,000 in damages.
According to Joseph Prodor, attorney for J.R.T. Nurseries owner Jag Aujla, the problems developed when J.R.T. switched to a new fertilizer in 2007 – Multicote 15-19-12 – produced by SunGro which has U.S. and Canadian operations, and blended by Wilbur-Ellis Co., headquartered in California. When the new fertilizer was applied again the following year – the cause of unusual symptoms at that stage still being a mystery – more dead plants was the result.
Prodor, who said he believed the $36 million to be one of the largest product liability awards to a Canadian company, said the damages were compensation for the losses of the dead plants and also for predicted future earnings. He said that Aujla’s reputation had been damaged along with his stock. "It wasn’t anything he did. He’d been doing it for years with great success, and unfortunately this horrible disaster happened," Prodor said. “It’s not over yet, however, as we expect the fertilizer companies involved to appeal the decision, which will take another two years.”
Wilbur-Ellis, which had blended the fertilizer for SunGro at its California operations, was found responsible to a lesser degree.
SunGro issued this brief response regarding the suit which has been in the legal process since 2010. “SunGro is disappointed in the verdict handed down by the jury in the trial that concluded in Portland last week. We are still in the process of digesting the contents of that decision, and are considering what course of action we will pursue next. No decision has been reached at this stage as to whether the company will file an appeal, although that remains one alternative under consideration.”
Wilbur-Ellis also expressed its disappointment with the findings and insisted that it did nothing wrong. “We are disappointed in the assignment of any liability to Wilbur‐Ellis, no matter how small, and we are considering the appropriate response. The evidence produced at trial showed that Wilbur‐Ellis merely acted as a toll manufacturer, and produced the fertilizer in question pursuant to specifications provided by our customer. There was no finding that Wilbur‐Ellis did anything improper or incorrectly with regard to the production of the fertilizer at issue.
“And while it was our customer who formulated, specified the components, and ultimately sold the fertilizer to the plaintiffs, the jury found that Wilbur Ellis was responsible for a small portion of the problem. We disagree, and continue to believe that we acted properly. Wilbur‐Ellis remains committed to providing quality products and services.”