Doe I v. Nestle USA, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
766 F.3d 1013 (2014) (rehearing and rehearing en banc denied, May 6, 2015)

- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
Nestle USA, Inc., Archer Daniels Midland Company, Cargill Incorporated Company, and Cargill Cocoa (defendants) controlled the majority of the cocoa produced in the Ivory Coast. However, the use of child slave labor in the Ivory Coast to produce cocoa was confirmed by many domestic and international organizations. The defendants provided both financial assistance and technical farming assistance to the cocoa farms in the Ivory Coast, including visiting the farms a few times per year for training and quality control. Additionally, the defendants lobbied against potential federal reforms designed to curb the use of child slaves. Three former child slaves (plaintiffs) were forced to work on the cocoa plantations in the Ivory Coast. The plaintiffs: (1) worked up to 14 hours per day, six days a week; (2) were locked in small rooms at night; (3) were not allowed to leave the plantations and were aware of brutal punishments for failed escapees, like having feet cut open and being forced to drink urine; (4) were only given scraps of food to eat; and (5) were whipped and beaten. The plaintiffs sued the defendants, alleging liability under the Alien Tort Statute and seeking class-action status. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants aided and abetted child slavery by providing assistance to the cocoa farmers. The defendants moved to dismiss the claims, and the trial court granted the motion. The plaintiffs appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Nelson, J.)
Dissent (Rawlinson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.