Dairy cooperatives export program antitrust lawsuit (Oriakhi v. NMPF)

Twenty-six consumers have sued the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) and 13 dairy cooperatives. They claim a shared export subsidy program pushes U.S. dairy supply overseas and raises what shoppers pay for milk, cheese, butter and other dairy products. The case is Oriakhi v. National Milk Producers Federation, No. 2:26-cv-01093, filed October 5, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Norfolk Division.

The proposed class covers people and businesses who bought dairy products for their own use, not directly from a defendant, from January 1, 2018 to the present. Damages claims run under the laws of dozens of states. Only the complaint and routine summons papers have been filed. No court has ruled, no class has been certified and there is no settlement.

NMPF, founded in 1916, is described in the complaint as a policy group representing most U.S. dairy-marketing cooperatives. It created Cooperatives Working Together (CWT) and now runs its export program under the name NMPF Exports and Trade, or NEXT.

The 13 cooperative defendants are Agri-Mark, Bongards Creameries, Cooperative Milk Producers Association, Dairy Farmers of America, Lanco Dairy Farms, Lonestar Milk Producers, Maryland and Virginia Milk Producers Cooperative (Maola Local Dairies), Michigan Milk Producers Association, Mount Joy Farmers Co-operative, Northwest Dairy Association (Darigold), Prairie Farms Dairy, Tillamook County Creamery Association and United Dairymen of Arizona. The complaint also names "Does 1-100" for defendants not yet identified.

The first-named plaintiff, Yvette Oriakhi, lives in New York. She and 25 others say they bought dairy at retail for personal use. They are represented by Glasser and Glasser of Norfolk and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro of Seattle. The docket lists U.S. District Judge Elizabeth W. Hanes and U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask.

NMPF launched CWT in July 2003. According to the complaint, CWT first paid farmers to retire whole dairy herds, then voted on October 26, 2010 to focus only on exports. The complaint says each defendant cooperative pays $0.02 per hundredweight of milk into the program. Members then request help on specific export sales of products such as butter, cheese, milk powder and milkfat, and CWT reviews those requests.

The complaint cites a 2011 CWT statement that participation equaled more than 70 percent of the U.S. milk supply. It says earlier lawsuits over the herd retirement program settled for $52 million in 2016 and $220 million in 2020.

The plaintiffs call the program a "cartel." They say competing cooperatives pay to subsidize each other's exports, which shrinks domestic supply and raises U.S. prices above competitive levels. They argue no cooperative would fund a rival's foreign sales unless all members expected higher domestic prices in return.

The complaint quotes the defendants' own words. It says then-CWT chief executive Jim Mulhern said in 2018 that the program "boosts milk prices for everyone." It also says NMPF's 2018 report credited CWT with raising farm milk prices "by an estimated average of $0.36/cwt. per year," which it called "a return nine times the investment."

NMPF describes the program differently. The trade publication Dairy Producer reported that NMPF says NEXT helps U.S. products compete overseas and expands demand for the milk used to make them. Dairy Producer also reported that when NMPF announced the earlier $220 million settlement, it said neither it nor its members admitted wrongdoing. Class Action Pulse found no NMPF response to this lawsuit's allegations as of October 21, 2026.

The docket shows the complaint on October 5, 2026, and proposed summonses on October 12, 2026. Summonses are the papers used to formally notify defendants of the suit. The court has issued no ruling on the merits.

The court has not decided whether the program violates antitrust law, whether the Capper-Volstead Act protects it or whether a class should be certified.

The proposed class is "all natural persons and entities who indirectly purchased dairy products," including milk, cheese, butter, yogurt and ice cream, "not directly from any Defendant, for personal consumption or end use, from January 1, 2018, through the present."

The state antitrust claim covers buyers under the laws of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin. A separate consumer protection claim lists other states as well, including Georgia, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Texas. The defendants' officers, directors and employees, their affiliates, and the assigned judges, their families and staff are excluded.

• You do not need to sign up, file or keep grocery receipts at this stage.
• Watch for news of defendants' responses or a motion to dismiss.
• If a settlement or judgment ever creates a claim process, a court-approved notice would explain who qualifies and how to file.
• Ignore anyone asking for payment or bank details to "join" this case.

No money is available. The federal Sherman Act claim asks only for a court order, because federal law generally bars indirect purchasers from recovering damages. The state claims seek actual damages, treble damages where state law allows, restitution, disgorgement and interest. The complaint also seeks fees and a jury trial. These are requests, not awards. The complaint does not estimate any amount per person.

• July 2003: NMPF launches CWT.
• October 26, 2010: CWT votes to focus only on exports, according to the complaint.
• January 1, 2018: The proposed class period begins.
• October 5, 2026: The complaint is filed.
• October 12, 2026: Proposed summonses are filed.

No opt-out, objection or claim deadlines exist. If a class is certified or a settlement is reached, notice would explain members' rights.

• Hundredweight (cwt): 100 pounds, the standard unit for selling raw milk. The complaint says the name CWT is a pun on it.
• Dairy cooperative: A business owned by the farmers who supply it with milk.
• Indirect purchaser: A buyer who purchases through a middleman, such as a grocery store.
• Illinois Brick repealer states: States whose laws let indirect purchasers recover antitrust damages.
• Capper-Volstead Act: A 1922 law giving farmer cooperatives a limited antitrust exemption to market products together.
• Supracompetitive prices: Prices higher than they would be with normal competition.

Once served, the defendants can answer or move to dismiss. The likely central fight is Capper-Volstead. The plaintiffs argue the exemption covers joint marketing, not limiting supply, and does not apply if cooperatives conspire with non-producers. The defendants have not yet responded. If the case survives, the parties would exchange evidence before any class certification motion.

For background on the program and the plaintiffs, see our report on the dairy cooperatives export program class action.

This article relies on the complaint, the court docket, Hagens Berman's case page and Dairy Producer's report.

The conspiracy, the price effects and the defendants' quoted intent are allegations. NMPF's views come from Dairy Producer's reporting, not a court filing. The docket view comes from a public archive and may not show every filing. Overcharge amounts and class size beyond the complaint's "millions" estimate are unknown.

Class Action Pulse is not a law firm or settlement administrator and does not guarantee eligibility or payment. This article is general information, not legal advice.