Previous Day: Wednesday, March 11Next Day:
Senate Journal: Index House Journal: Index
Legislation: Index Bill History: Index

Previous Page: 673Today's Journal Page

This file contains STRIKE and UNDERSCORE. If you cannot see either STRIKE or UNDERSCORE attributes or would like to change how these attributes are displayed, please use the following form to make the desired changes.

House Journal: Page 674: Thursday, March 12, 1998

13   that the animal feeding operation does shall
not be
14   found to unreasonably and continuously for
15   periods of time interfere with another person's
16   comfortable use and enjoyment of the person's life or
17   property under any other cause of action.  The
18   rebuttable presumption also applies to persons who are
19   not required to obtain a permit pursuant to chapter
20   455B for an animal feeding operation as defined in
21   section 455B.161.  The rebuttable presumption
22   this section shall not apply if the person bringing
23   the action proves that an injury to a the
person or
24   damage to the person's property is proximately caused
25   by a either of the following:
26     a.  The failure to comply with a federal statute or
27   regulation or a state statute or rule which applies to
28   the animal feeding operation.
29     b.  3.  The rebuttable presumption may be overcome
30   by clear and convincing evidence of both Both of the
31   following:
32     a. (1)  The animal feeding operation unreasonably
33   and continuously for substantial periods of time
34   interferes with another the person's comfortable use
35   and enjoyment of the person's life or property.
36     b. (2)  The injury or damage is proximately
37   by the negligent operation of the animal feeding
38   operation failed to use existing prudent generally
39   accepted management practices reasonable for the
40   operation.
41     5.  The rebuttable presumption created by this
42   section shall apply regardless of the established date
43   of operation or expansion of the animal feeding
44   operation.  The rebuttable presumption A defense
45   against a cause of action provided in this section
46   includes, but is not limited to, a defense for actions
47   arising out of the care and feeding of animals; the
48   handling or transportation of animals; the treatment
49   or disposal of manure resulting from animals; the
50   transportation and application of animal manure; and

Page 2  

 1   the creation of noise, odor, dust, or fumes arising
 2   from an animal feeding operation.
 3     6.  An animal feeding operation that complies with
 4   the requirements in chapter 455B for animal feeding
 5   operations shall be deemed to meet any common law
 6   requirements regarding the standard of a normal person
 7   living in the locality of the operation.
 8     7.  A If a court determines that a claim is
 9   frivolous, a person who brings the claim as part of
10   losing cause of action against a person for whom the
11   rebuttable presumption created who may raise a
12   under this section is not rebutted, shall be liable to

Next Page: 675

Previous Day: Wednesday, March 11Next Day:
Senate Journal: Index House Journal: Index
Legislation: Index Bill History: Index

Return To Home index

© 1998 Cornell College and League of Women Voters of Iowa

Comments about this site or page?
Please remember that the person listed above does not vote on bills. Direct all comments concerning legislation to State Legislators.

Last update: Fri Mar 13 13:40:03 CST 1998
URL: /DOCS/GA/77GA/Session.2/HJournal/00600/00674.html