3. The Defendants

3.1. Mr. Tim Curry is the elected District Attorney in Tarrant County, Texas, where Plaintiff Beltex Corporation operates its business. His office is at 401 W. Belknap, Fort Worth, Texas, where summons with this Complaint can be served on him. On August 29, 2002, Mr. Curry's Assistant Criminal District Attorney Richard Alpert wrote Beltex a letter, in which he requested Beltex representatives to contact him because two Texas legislators had contacted Mr. Curry's office about Chapter 149. The letter transmitted a copy of Chapter 149 and the Attorney General=s Opinion. Beltex representatives met with representatives from Mr. Curry's office, and, as a result, believe investigation and prosecution to be imminent.

3.2. Mr. Bill Conradt is the District Attorney for Kaufman County, Texas, where the Plaintiff, Dallas Crown, Inc., operates it business. His office is at 100 W. Mulberry St., Kaufman, Texas 75142, where a summons with this Complaint can be served on him. On September 19, 2002, the Fort Worth Star Telegram reported that Mr. Conradt was investigating Dallas Crown and that he planned to file criminal charges.

4. The Plaintiffs

4.1. Beltex Corporation is a Texas corporation, operating a meat processing plant in Fort Worth, Texas. Beltex has processed horsemeat for human consumption for 27 years, and all of the product for human consumption was exported from the United States. In the United States, Beltex sells its product to zoos, and by-products for other non-consumption purposes. It has paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in property taxes, and paid significant fees to agencies of the State. Beltex employs 90 people, had gross sales exceeding $30,000,000 in 2001, and processed more than 27,000 horses that year. Beltex pays more than $3,000,000 a year for transportation in interstate and foreign commerce. If Chapter 149 is enforceable, Beltex will cease operations in Texas.

4.2. Dallas Crown, Inc. is a Texas corporation, operating a meat processing plant in Kaufman, Texas. Dallas Crown, Inc. processes meat for human consumption and all of that product is exported from the United States. In the United States, it sells its product to zoos, and other by-products for non-consumption purposes. It has paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in property taxes, and paid significant fees to agencies of the State of Texas. Dallas Crown employs 40 people, had gross sales exceeding $9,000,000 in 2001, and processed more than 13,000 horses that year. Dallas Crown pays more than $1,100,000 a year for transportation in interstate and foreign commerce. If Chapter 149 is enforceable, Dallas Crown will cease operations in Texas.

4.3. Empacadora de Carnes de Fresnillo, S.A. de C.V. is a corporation organized under the laws of Mexico, with meat processing operations in Fresnillo, in the state of Zacatecas, in north central Mexico, Empacador de Carnes employs 90 people. In 2001 its sales in pesos exceeded $63,000,000, and it slaughtered in excess of 25,000 horses, while paying more than $1,500,000 (Pesos) in freight charges. Most of its product is distributed in foreign commerce. Processed horsemeat for export for human consumption is transported by container truck from Fresnillo to Laredo, Mexico. It is placed in a bonded warehouse, where it must pass United States= customs and health inspection requirements. It is then delivered into Texas, and transported to the port in Houston or to Dallas-Fort Worth Airport for international airfreight delivery. If Chapter 149 is enforceable, Empacadora de Carnes will not be able to transport its processed product through Texas, and will be denied access to an international port and airport. Texas Chapter 149 will impose a permanent embargo on its product entering or leaving Texas, subjecting the transporters to criminal liability, and will close, under the authority of Texas law alone, the 1200 mile border in Texas that separates Mexico from the United States. The effect of this Texas law is not to protect Texas residents from any food product or deceptive activity, because none of the product is sold to consumers in Texas, and all of the meets United States standards for food intended for safe human consumption.

5. Real Parties In Interest

5.1. The State of Texas is a real party in interest as defined by Fed. R. Civ. P. 17. Because the two named defendants in their official capacities are representatives of Texas, it is not necessary to make Texas a party under Fed. R. Civ. P. 19. Because the validity of a state statute is being challenged under federal law, a copy of the Complaint is being sent to The Office of the Attorney General State of Texas, P.O. Box 12548, Austin, Texas 78711-2548.

5.2. United States of America, through the Department of Agriculture, is a real party in interest. As an agency of the executive branch, it implements policies of the federal government relating to the sale and distribution of horsemeat for human consumption in interstate and foreign commerce. It is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court, and its interests relating to the subject matter of this lawsuit are ones it may want to protect, as provided by Fed. R. Civ. P. 19(a)(i). A copy of this Complaint will be served on the Secretary of Agriculture, Ann Veneman, 1400 Independence Ave. S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250, the United States Attorney General John Ashcroft, at 5111 Main Justice Bldg., 10th St. and Constitution Ave. N.W. Washington D.C. 20530, and United States Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, James Boyle, 1100 Commerce, Dallas, Texas 75242.

6. Relief Requested

6.1. Plaintiffs are under imminent threat of prosecution by the Defendants. The statute Defendants are relying on is illegal, facially and in application violates the interstate and foreign commerce clauses of the United States Constitution, purports to ban a commercial activity subject to preeminent regulation by United States statutes and executive branch regulations, contravenes treaties and international agreements and violates the Fifth Amendment. The threatened prosecutions, if charges are pursued, will cause the Texas Plaintiff's businesses to fail or be closed. Ultimate success by the Plaintiffs in state courts could take so long that Plaintiffs will be put out of business in the interim.

6.2. To avoid irreparable injury and loss, Plaintiffs seek a declaration of their rights and legal relations, as provided by 28 U.S.C. ' 2201. Specifically, Plaintiffs seek a federal court declaration that Chapter 149 is not enforceable against them because its application is preempted by federal statutes and regulations. Alternatively, under state law, Chapter 149 has been repealed.

6.3. To prevent irreparable injury and loss to Plaintiffs until final disposition of this case, Plaintiffs seek, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 65, a temporary restraining order and temporary injunction enjoining prosecution of Plaintiffs under Chapter 149. Upon final judgment, Plaintiffs request a permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of Chapter 149.

Read more >>