BPI Wants ABC News Lawsuit Sent Back to State Court

SOUTH DAKOTA Beef Products, Inc. (BPI), the company suing ABC News and its journalists in a $1.2 billion complaint, has asked a federal judge to return the case to state court.

In a motion filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota, lawyers for the plaintiffs asked Judge Karen E. Schreier to send the case back to the South Dakota Circuit Court in Union County.

ABC and its journalists including Diane Sawyer were sued over their portrayal of BPI's "lean finely textured beef" or "pink slime" as the product has been infamously dubbed.

The federal court lacks "subject matter jurisdiction" over the lawsuit, the plaintiffs argue, due to a lack of "complete diversity of citizenship" between the parties.

ABC removed the case to federal court, arguing such diversity existed because two of the plaintiffs BPI Technology, Inc. and Freezing Machines, Inc. weren't actually "real parties in interest" and therefore have no right to assert claims in the 257-page complaint.

In a memorandum, plaintiffs declare BPI Technology and Freezing Machines both Delaware corporations are real parties in interest because they both "suffered reputational and financial damage" and will "benefit" if they succeed on their claims. This means there is not complete diversity of citizenship because defendants American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. and ABC News, Inc. also are Delaware corporations, lawyers for the plaintiffs explain in their request to send the case back to state court.

ABC has asked the federal court to dismiss the lawsuit for a number of reasons. Erik Connolly, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said plaintiffs will respond to the defendants' arguments after the court rules on the request for a remand back to state court.

In September, BPI filed its lawsuit against ABC News, journalists, former government officials and an ex-employee of the meat company. The South Dakota-based meat company claims ABC launched untruthful and vicious attacks against it in a series of broadcasts and online reports that have hurt its bottom line and relationships.

Lawyers who practice media law have said BPI faces many hurdles proving its case given the broad protections offered by the First Amendment and higher standard of proof that applies in such cases.