 
            AMT431- FARMERS VS. THE STATE Did Virginia Just Blink? Something tactical is brewing...| As a Man Thinketh
Virginia’s sudden nonsuit against Triple Oaks looks far less like surrender than a tactical reset. The state stepped back before a courtroom fight, but law and precedent make it easy to refile—especially with Florida’s recent raw-milk illness cluster...
Available via subscription or rental
Already purchased? Sign In
Bundle Preview
This content is not available in your region
AMT431- FARMERS VS. THE STATE Did Virginia Just Blink? Something tactical is brewing...| As a Man Thinketh
Virginia’s sudden nonsuit against Triple Oaks looks far less like surrender than a tactical reset. The state stepped back before a courtroom fight, but law and precedent make it easy to refile—especially with Florida’s recent raw-milk illness cluster giving regulators fresh political cover.
The Case of Triple Oaks Farm
In Campbell County, VA, Triple Oaks Farm—a Private Membership Association run by Bryson and Mackenzie Lipscomb—was sued by the Virginia Department of Health in July 2025, accused of illegally selling raw milk to the public despite its members-only structure. A hearing was noticed for Monday, Sept. 22, and the case drew movement attention (Joel Salatin urged supporters to “stand” with the farm). But the week before the hearing, the Commonwealth voluntarily nonsuited (dropped) the case, ending this round without a ruling on the merits.
What happened or rather what was postponed…
In mid-September, the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) withdrew its lawsuit alleging that Triple Oaks Farm was illegally selling raw milk to the public despite operating as a Private Membership Association (PMA). Local TV reported the withdrawal and carried the farm’s claim of “government overreach.” Joel Salatin, who amplified the case to his audience, posted “WE WON,” framing the nonsuit as a movement victory. 
But in Virginia, a nonsuit is not a judgment on the merits—it’s a do-over. State law lets a plaintiff unilaterally dismiss and typically re-file within six months (the well-known “savings period”). Courts and practitioners describe nonsuit as a procedural “pause” to regroup on pleadings, evidence, and witnesses—not a capitulation. 
Read the tea leaves: Dropping the case before a contested hearing suggests VDH preferred to retool: tighten factual allegations (e.g., how offers were made, who could buy, labeling, sanitation records) and return on stronger ground rather than risk an early loss that PMA advocates would trumpet as precedent.
Join this channel and support our efforts:
Categories: Lifestyle
Starring: Charlie and Shuana Rankin
 
                 
    