The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Bates (P) are 29 Texas peanut farmers who allege that in the 2000 growing season their crops were severely damaged by the application of Dow's (D) pesticide named 'Strongarm.' The EPA conditionally registered Strongarm on March 8, 2000. According to Ps, D knew or should have known, that Strongarm would stunt the growth of peanuts in soils with pH levels of 7.0 or greater. When Ps applied Strongarm on their farms - whose soils have pH levels of 7.2 or higher, as is typical in western Texas - the pesticide severely damaged their peanut crops while failing to control the growth of weeds. After unsuccessful negotiations, Ps gave D notice of their intent to bring suit as required by the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act. D filed a declaratory judgment action asserting that Ps' claims were expressly or impliedly pre-empted by FIFRA. Ps brought counterclaims, including tort claims sounding in strict liability and negligence. The Court granted D's motion for summary judgment, rejecting one claim on state-law grounds and dismissing the remainder as expressly pre-empted. The Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.