Text: SF02121 Text: SF02123 Text: SF02100 - SF02199 Text: SF Index Bills and Amendments: General Index Bill History: General Index
PAG LIN 1 1 Section 1. Section 657.11, subsections 2 and 3, Code 1997, 1 2 are amended to read as follows: 1 3 2. If a person has received all permits required pursuant 1 4 to chapter 455B for an animal feeding operation, as defined in 1 5 section 455B.161, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that 1 6 an animal feeding operation is not a public or private 1 7 nuisance under this chapter or under principles of common law, 1 8 and that the animal feeding operation does not unreasonably 1 9and continuouslyinterfere with another person's comfortable 1 10 use and enjoyment of the person's life or property under any 1 11 other cause of action. The rebuttable presumption also 1 12 applies to persons who are not required to obtain a permit 1 13 pursuant to chapter 455B for an animal feeding operation as 1 14 defined in section 455B.161. The rebuttable presumption shall 1 15 not apply if the injury to a person or damage to property is 1 16 proximately caused by a failure to comply with a federal 1 17 statute or regulation or a state statute or rule which applies 1 18 to the animal feeding operation. 1 19 3. The rebuttable presumption may be overcome byclear and1 20convincinga preponderance of the evidenceof both of the1 21following:1 22a. Thethat the animal feeding operation unreasonablyand1 23continuouslyinterferes with another person's comfortable use 1 24 and enjoyment of the person's life or property and that either 1 25 of the following applies:.1 26b.a. The injury or damage is proximately caused by the 1 27 negligent operation of the animal feeding operation. 1 28 b. The animal feeding operation failed to minimize the 1 29 source of the interference by using technology and practices 1 30 that a prudent person would consider reasonable based on the 1 31 size of the operation. 1 32 EXPLANATION 1 33 This bill amends Code section 657.11, which provides that 1 34 in a legal action asserting a nuisance against an animal 1 35 feeding operation, there is a rebuttable presumption that the 2 1 animal feeding operation which complies with state and federal 2 2 regulations is not a public or private nuisance. The Code 2 3 section provides that the rebuttable presumption must be 2 4 overcome by clear and convincing evidence of two facts: (1) 2 5 that the operation unreasonably and continuously interferes 2 6 with the comfortable use and enjoyment of life or property, 2 7 and (2) the injury or damage is proximately caused by the 2 8 negligent operation of the animal feeding operation. 2 9 This bill provides that a plaintiff must overcome the 2 10 presumption by a preponderance of the evidence. It eliminates 2 11 the requirement providing that the interference must be 2 12 continuous. It also provides that the presumption may be 2 13 overcome by evidence that the animal operation unreasonably 2 14 interferes with another person's life and property and either 2 15 the injury or damage is proximately caused by negligence or 2 16 the operation failed to minimize the source of the 2 17 interference by using technology and practices that a prudent 2 18 person would consider reasonable based on the size of the 2 19 operation. 2 20 LSB 3997XS 77 2 21 da/jl/8.1
Text: SF02121 Text: SF02123 Text: SF02100 - SF02199 Text: SF Index Bills and Amendments: General Index Bill History: General Index
© 1998 Cornell College and League of Women Voters of Iowa
Comments about this site or page?
webmaster@legis.iowa.gov.
Please remember that the person listed above does not vote on bills. Direct all comments concerning legislation to State Legislators.
Last update: Tue Feb 17 03:40:03 CST 1998
URL: /DOCS/GA/77GA/Legislation/SF/02100/SF02122/980205.html
jhf