Miller ordered to make ‘good faith’ payments to court and FSIS

After a court conference call last week where Amos Miller agreed to comply with a court order, the judge then ordered him to make “good faith” payments totaling $105,065.

Miller responded with a storm of court documents, usually signing them as “Amos Miller, living man.” In a submission, he asks the court to return his attorney of record, Steven Lafuente.

The court has refused to dismiss Lafuente from the case since Miller last year “fired” the attorney from Dallas. Miller wants to replace him with a group of “sovereign citizens” out of Washington state. This time, Miller’s revocation request involved an allegation that membership in the bar nullifies citizenship.

The “good faith” payment order is $50,000 to the court and $55,065 to the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service, which is intended to reimburse Miller and Miller’s Organic Farm. In the order, the judge noted that Lafuente was available to advise Miller on payment and the attorney was ordered to provide prompt notice if there was a problem.

Conference calls involving all parties are not released as public documents. The good faith payment order followed a conference on April 22, and Miller’s many deposits followed the order.

These have included:

  • “Notice and Filing of New Business Structure by Amos Miller.”
  • “Motion to dismiss counsel from filing documents by Amos Miller.”
  • “Notice of Interlocutory Appeal”
  • “Penhallow v. Doane’s Premises Notice”
  • “Practice Order to Clark Regarding Defendant’s Status.”

In this civil action, the USDA is suing Miller for compliance with basic food safety laws and regulations. The case is being heard in the U.S. District Court for Eastern Pennsylvania before Judge Edward G. Smith.

Perhaps significant in Miller’s recent filings is the one claiming his Amos Miller Organic Farm Trust is an “association” that “does not do business with the public.” The record says the association “operates in accordance with free will.”

Another Miller document cites the Hague Convention of October 5, 1961 for authentication.

Justice Smith previously found Miller in contempt of court, fining him $250,000 which was suspended. Since March, Justice Smith has relied on agricultural expert Geroge Lapsley as the court’s expert on all matters relating to Miller’s farming efforts. The current legal proceedings are three years old.

The court-imposed duties on Lapsley were to determine whether Miller was in breach of “the second contempt penalty order.” He had to check all of Miller’s properties and businesses to:

  • any livestock/poultry slaughtering or processing operation (including duty-exempt operations) at any site;
  • distributing, shipping, offering for sale or selling edible meat or poultry products;
  • take, send or cause to be sent/delivered, for the purpose of slaughter and/or processing, any animal likely to be slaughtered at a slaughter and/or processing establishment, facility or individual, inspected or not by the federal government ;
  • the purchase, handling, storage and/or receipt of any live livestock or poultry suitable for slaughter in the near future;
  • the purchase, handling, storage or receipt of meat or poultry products suitable for further processing and/or for resale, distribution, offering for sale, sale, gift or distribution to clients ; or
  • take in person, Internet, telephone, fax, e-mail or other orders – or act on such orders – for acceptable meat/poultry products from defendants or their agents, including, but not limited to, members Miller family, clubs/vendors associated with Miller, David Lantz, Miller employees or the Groff family.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, Click here.)

Comments are closed.