Pigford v. Glickman
Encyclopedia
Pigford v. Glickman was a class action
lawsuit against the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA), alleging racial discrimination in its allocation of farm loans and assistance between 1983 and 1997. The lawsuit ended with a settlement on April 14, 1999, by Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. To date, almost US$1 billion has been paid or credited to more than 13,300 farmers under the settlement's consent decree
, under what is reportedly the largest civil rights settlement to date. As another 70,000 farmers had filed late and not had their claims heard, the 2008 Farm Bill provided for additional claims to be heard; and in December 2010, Congress appropriated $1.2 billion for what is called Pigford II, the second part of the case.
attempted to farm between January 1, 1981, and December 31, 1996, (2) applied to USDA for
farm credit or program benefits and believes that he or she was discriminated against by the
USDA on the basis of race, and (3) made a complaint against the USDA on or before July 1,
1997. The consent decree set up a system for notice, claims submission, consideration, and
review that involved a facilitator, arbitrator, adjudicator, and monitor, all with assigned
responsibilities. The funds to pay the costs of the settlement (including legal fees) come from the
Judgment Fund operated by the Department of the Treasury, not from USDA accounts or
appropriations.
, the Secretary of Agriculture, was the nominal defendant. The allegations were that the USDA treated black farmers unfairly when deciding to allocate price support loans, disaster payments, "farm ownership" loans, and operating loans, and that the USDA had failed to process subsequent complaints about racial discrimination.
After the lawsuit was filed, Pigford requested blanket mediation to cover what was thought to be about 2,000 farmers who may have been discriminated against, but the U.S. Department of Justice opposed the mediation, saying that each case had to be investigated separately. As the case moved toward trial, the presiding judge certified as a class all black farmers who filed discrimination complaints against the USDA between 1983 and 1997.
The Pigford consent decree established a two-track dispute resolution mechanism for
those seeking relief.
The most widely used option was called "Track A". which could provide a monetary settlement of $50,000 plus relief in the form of loan forgiveness and offsets of tax liability.
Track A claimants had to present substantial evidence (i.e., a reasonable basis for finding that discrimination happened) that:
• claimant owned or leased, or attempted to own or lease, farm land;
• claimant applied for a specific credit transaction at a USDA county office during the applicable period;
• the loan was denied, provided late, approved for a lesser amount than requested, encumbered by restrictive conditions, or USDA failed to provide appropriate loan service, and such treatment was less favorable than that accorded specifically identified, similarly situated white farmers; and
• the USDA’s treatment of the loan application led to economic damage to the class member.
Alternatively, affected farmers could follow the "Track B" process. Track B claimants had to prove their claims and actual damages by a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., it is more likely than not that their claims are valid). The documentation to support such a claim and the amount of relief are reviewed by a third party arbitrator, who makes a binding decision. The consent decree also provided injunctive relief, primarily in the form of priority consideration for loans and purchases, and technical assistance in filling out forms. Finally, plaintiffs were permitted to withdraw from the class and pursue their individual cases in federal court or through the USDA administrative process.
This settlement was approved on April 14, 1999, by Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Far beyond the anticipated 2,000 affected farmers, 22,505 "Track A" applications were heard and decided upon, of which 13,348 (59%) were approved. US$995 million had been disbursed or credited to the "Track A" applicants , including US$760 million disbursed as US$50,000 cash awards. Fewer than 200 farmers opted for the "Track B" process. This was reportedly the largest federal settlement for civil rights violations to date.
Beyond those applications that were heard and decided upon, about 70,000 petitions were filed late and were not allowed to proceed. Some have argued that the notice program was defective, and others blamed the farmers' attorneys for "the inadequate notice and overall mismanagement of the settlement agreement". A provision in the 2008 farm bill essentially allowed a re-hearing in civil court for any claimant whose claim had been denied without a decision that had been based on its merits.
The largest compensation , from the first part of the Pigford case, was the $13 million paid to the members of the defunct collective farm
New Communities
of Southwest Georgia
in 2009; their attorney said that the value of the land of their former 6,000-acre farm was likely worth $9 million alone.
to bring the suit.
Legislative language was added to the 2008 Farm Bill to enable more farmers to bring suit and to authorize the government to negotiate additional monies for settlement. In 2010, the Administration had negotiated settlement for an additional $1.2 billion for such claims.}}, in what is known as Pigford II. Congress appropriated the money for the settlement later that year.
Class action
In law, a class action, a class suit, or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued...
lawsuit against the United States Department of Agriculture
United States Department of Agriculture
The United States Department of Agriculture is the United States federal executive department responsible for developing and executing U.S. federal government policy on farming, agriculture, and food...
(USDA), alleging racial discrimination in its allocation of farm loans and assistance between 1983 and 1997. The lawsuit ended with a settlement on April 14, 1999, by Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. To date, almost US$1 billion has been paid or credited to more than 13,300 farmers under the settlement's consent decree
Consent decree
A consent decree is a final, binding judicial decree or judgment memorializing a voluntary agreement between parties to a suit in return for withdrawal of a criminal charge or an end to a civil litigation...
, under what is reportedly the largest civil rights settlement to date. As another 70,000 farmers had filed late and not had their claims heard, the 2008 Farm Bill provided for additional claims to be heard; and in December 2010, Congress appropriated $1.2 billion for what is called Pigford II, the second part of the case.
Terms of the Consent Decree
Under the consent decree, an eligible recipient is an African American who (1) farmed orattempted to farm between January 1, 1981, and December 31, 1996, (2) applied to USDA for
farm credit or program benefits and believes that he or she was discriminated against by the
USDA on the basis of race, and (3) made a complaint against the USDA on or before July 1,
1997. The consent decree set up a system for notice, claims submission, consideration, and
review that involved a facilitator, arbitrator, adjudicator, and monitor, all with assigned
responsibilities. The funds to pay the costs of the settlement (including legal fees) come from the
Judgment Fund operated by the Department of the Treasury, not from USDA accounts or
appropriations.
Case history
The lawsuit was filed in 1997 by Timothy Pigford, who was joined by 400 additional African-American farmer plaintiffs. Dan GlickmanDan Glickman
Daniel Robert "Dan" Glickman is an American businessman and politician. He served as the United States Secretary of Agriculture from 1995 until 2001, prior to which he represented the Fourth Congressional District of Kansas as a Democrat in Congress for 18 years. He was Chairman and CEO of the...
, the Secretary of Agriculture, was the nominal defendant. The allegations were that the USDA treated black farmers unfairly when deciding to allocate price support loans, disaster payments, "farm ownership" loans, and operating loans, and that the USDA had failed to process subsequent complaints about racial discrimination.
After the lawsuit was filed, Pigford requested blanket mediation to cover what was thought to be about 2,000 farmers who may have been discriminated against, but the U.S. Department of Justice opposed the mediation, saying that each case had to be investigated separately. As the case moved toward trial, the presiding judge certified as a class all black farmers who filed discrimination complaints against the USDA between 1983 and 1997.
The Pigford consent decree established a two-track dispute resolution mechanism for
those seeking relief.
The most widely used option was called "Track A". which could provide a monetary settlement of $50,000 plus relief in the form of loan forgiveness and offsets of tax liability.
Track A claimants had to present substantial evidence (i.e., a reasonable basis for finding that discrimination happened) that:
• claimant owned or leased, or attempted to own or lease, farm land;
• claimant applied for a specific credit transaction at a USDA county office during the applicable period;
• the loan was denied, provided late, approved for a lesser amount than requested, encumbered by restrictive conditions, or USDA failed to provide appropriate loan service, and such treatment was less favorable than that accorded specifically identified, similarly situated white farmers; and
• the USDA’s treatment of the loan application led to economic damage to the class member.
Alternatively, affected farmers could follow the "Track B" process. Track B claimants had to prove their claims and actual damages by a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., it is more likely than not that their claims are valid). The documentation to support such a claim and the amount of relief are reviewed by a third party arbitrator, who makes a binding decision. The consent decree also provided injunctive relief, primarily in the form of priority consideration for loans and purchases, and technical assistance in filling out forms. Finally, plaintiffs were permitted to withdraw from the class and pursue their individual cases in federal court or through the USDA administrative process.
This settlement was approved on April 14, 1999, by Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Payouts
Originally, claimants were to have filed within 180 days of the consent decree. Late claims were accepted for an additional year afterwards, if they could show extraordinary circumstances that prevented them from filing on time.Far beyond the anticipated 2,000 affected farmers, 22,505 "Track A" applications were heard and decided upon, of which 13,348 (59%) were approved. US$995 million had been disbursed or credited to the "Track A" applicants , including US$760 million disbursed as US$50,000 cash awards. Fewer than 200 farmers opted for the "Track B" process. This was reportedly the largest federal settlement for civil rights violations to date.
Beyond those applications that were heard and decided upon, about 70,000 petitions were filed late and were not allowed to proceed. Some have argued that the notice program was defective, and others blamed the farmers' attorneys for "the inadequate notice and overall mismanagement of the settlement agreement". A provision in the 2008 farm bill essentially allowed a re-hearing in civil court for any claimant whose claim had been denied without a decision that had been based on its merits.
The largest compensation , from the first part of the Pigford case, was the $13 million paid to the members of the defunct collective farm
Collective farming
Collective farming and communal farming are types of agricultural production in which the holdings of several farmers are run as a joint enterprise...
New Communities
New Communities
New Communities was a land trust and farm collective owned and operated by approximately a dozen black farm farmers 1969 – 1985. Once one of the largest-acreage African American-owned properties in the United States, it was situated in Southwest Georgia....
of Southwest Georgia
Southwest Georgia
Southwest Georgia is a thirteen-county region in the U.S. state of Georgia. A common acronym used is SOWEGA.The largest city is Albany. Counties include Baker, Calhoun, Colquitt, Decatur, Dougherty, Early, Grady, Lee, Miller, Mitchell, Seminole, Terrell, Thomas, and Worth.In 1995, 25% of the...
in 2009; their attorney said that the value of the land of their former 6,000-acre farm was likely worth $9 million alone.
Subsequent events
In 2004, the Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association filed a US$20.5 billion class action lawsuit against the USDA for the same practices, alleging racially discriminatory practices between 1997 and 2004. The lawsuit was dismissed when the BFAA failed to show it had standingStanding (law)
In law, standing or locus standi is the term for the ability of a party to demonstrate to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case...
to bring the suit.
Legislative language was added to the 2008 Farm Bill to enable more farmers to bring suit and to authorize the government to negotiate additional monies for settlement. In 2010, the Administration had negotiated settlement for an additional $1.2 billion for such claims.}}, in what is known as Pigford II. Congress appropriated the money for the settlement later that year.
See also
- List of class action lawsuits
- New CommunitiesNew CommunitiesNew Communities was a land trust and farm collective owned and operated by approximately a dozen black farm farmers 1969 – 1985. Once one of the largest-acreage African American-owned properties in the United States, it was situated in Southwest Georgia....
- Resignation of Shirley SherrodResignation of Shirley SherrodOn July 19, 2010, Shirley Sherrod was forced to resign from her appointed position as Georgia State Director of Rural Development for the United States Department of Agriculture because of video excerpts from her address to a March 2010 NAACP event, which the blogger Andrew Breitbart had posted on...