9 C.F.R. § 201.217

Reasonable period of time to remedy a breach of contract

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The Secretary may consider various criteria when determining whether a packer, swine contractor or live poultry dealer has provided a poultry grower or swine production contract grower a reasonable period of time to remedy a breach of contract that could lead to contract termination. These criteria do not limit a packer, swine contractor or live poultry dealer's rights under a contract or agreement where food safety or animal welfare is concerned. These criteria, include, but are not limited to:

(a) Whether the packer, swine contractor or live poultry dealer provided written notice of the breach of contract to the poultry grower or swine production contract grower upon initial discovery of that breach of contract if the packer, swine contractor or live poultry dealer intends to take an adverse action, including termination of a contract, against the poultry grower or swine production contract grower based on that breach of contract by the poultry grower or swine production contract grower;

(b) Whether the notice in paragraph (a) of this section includes the following:

(1) A description of the act or omission believed to constitute a breach of contract, including identification of the section of the contract believed to have been breached;

(2) The date of the breach;

(3) The means by which the poultry grower or swine production contract grower can satisfactorily remedy the breach, if possible, based on the nature of the breach; and

(4) A date that provides a reasonable time, based on the nature of the breach, by which the breach must be remedied.

(c) Whether the packer, swine contractor or live poultry dealer took into account the poultry grower's or swine production contract grower's ongoing responsibilities related to the raising and handling of the poultry or swine under their care when establishing the date by which a breach should be remedied; and

(d) Whether the poultry grower or swine production contract grower was afforded adequate time from the date of the notice of the alleged breach to rebut the allegation of a breach.

[76 FR 76889, Dec. 9, 2011]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2020–2020 · leading case: Sanders v. Koch Foods, Inc. (S.D. Miss. 2020).
Sanders v. Koch Foods, Inc. (S.D. Miss. 2020). “”); 9 C.F.R. § 201.217 (“The Secretary may consider various criteria when determining whether a packer, swine contractor or live poultry dealer has provided a poultry grower or swine production contract grower a reasonable period of time to remedy a breach of contract that could…”
Lutz v. Case Farms, LLC (W.D.N.C. 2020). “9 C.F.R. § 201.217 . Lutz argues that the June 1 letter from Case was the termination letter and that it fails to satisfy the PSA because it did not provide him with 90 days’ notice, as required by 9 C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.