ZEVOLI 243 (PTY) LTD. v. DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY et al
Plaintiff: ZEVOLI 243 (PTY) LTD.
Defendant: DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC and DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY
Case Number: 1:2017cv03059
Filed: September 1, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge: Debra McVicker Lynch
Presiding Judge: Jane Magnus-Stinson
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
April 4, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER - This matter is before the Court on Defendants Dow Chemical Company ("Dow Chemical") and Dow Agrosciences LLC's ("Dow Agro") collectively, "Defendants") Motion to Dismiss. [Filing No. 20 .] Plaintiff Zevol i 243 (PTY) Ltd.'s ("Zevoli") Complaint for Damages and Declaratory Judgment ("Complaint") seeks relief for alleged environmental contamination of real property owned by Zevoli in South Africa by Defendants' subsidiary Dow AgroSciences Southern Africa (Proprietary) Limited ("Dow South Africa"). [Filing No. 1 ]. Defendants move to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), 12(b)(6), and the common law doctrine of for um non conveniens. For the reasons stated in this Order, the Court DENIES IN PART and GRANTS IN PART Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. For the reasons stated in this Order, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Dow Chemical for lack of personal jur isdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) is GRANTED. 20 . Zevoli's request for jurisdictional discovery is DENIED. Finally, Dow Agro is ORDERED to file a report within 14 days of the entry of this Order stating whether it agrees to the conditions discussed in this Order relating to South Africa as an available forum. If Dow Agro agrees to the conditions discussed herein, the Motion to Dismiss based on forum non conveniens grounds will be granted without prejudice. If Dow Agro does not consent, the Court requests that the Magistrate Judge schedule a case management conference. (SEE ORDER). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 4/4/2018. (APD)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: ZEVOLI 243 (PTY) LTD. v. DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC
Represented By: Matthew B. Barr
Represented By: John Ewald
Represented By: Kristen R. Fournier
Represented By: Robert D. MacGill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY
Represented By: Matthew B. Barr
Represented By: John Ewald
Represented By: Kristen R. Fournier
Represented By: Robert D. MacGill
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: ZEVOLI 243 (PTY) LTD.
Represented By: Christina T. Hassel
Represented By: Alice McKenzie Morical
Represented By: Amanda L.B. Mulroony
Represented By: Royce Roberts Remington
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?