Bill Text: IA HF468 | 2017-2018 | 87th General Assembly | Introduced
Bill Title: A bill for an act providing for certain court actions involving an allegation of a public or private nuisance or the interference with a person’s comfortable use and enjoyment of life or property caused by an animal feeding operation, providing for the award of damages, costs, and expenses, and including effective date provisions. (Formerly HSB 134.)
Spectrum: Committee Bill
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2017-03-22 - Withdrawn. H.J. 754. [HF468 Detail]
Download: Iowa-2017-HF468-Introduced.html
House File 468 - Introduced HOUSE FILE BY COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE (SUCCESSOR TO HSB 134) A BILL FOR 1 An Act providing for certain court actions involving an 2 allegation of a public or private nuisance or the 3 interference with a person's comfortable use and enjoyment 4 of life or property caused by an animal feeding operation, 5 providing for the award of damages, costs, and expenses, and 6 including effective date provisions. 7 BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF IOWA: TLSB 1745HV (1) 87 da/rj PAG LIN 1 1 Section 1. NEW SECTION. 657.11A Animal agriculture == 1 2 promotion of responsible animal feeding operations. 1 3 1. a. Findings. The general assembly finds that important 1 4 public interests are advanced by preserving and encouraging the 1 5 expansion of responsible animal agricultural production in this 1 6 state which provides employment opportunities in and economic 1 7 growth for rural Iowa, contributes tax revenues to the state 1 8 and to local communities, and protects our valuable natural 1 9 resources. 1 10 b. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to encourage 1 11 persons involved in animal agriculture to adopt existing 1 12 prudent and generally utilized management practices for their 1 13 animal feeding operations, thereby enhancing the fundamental 1 14 role of animal agriculture in this state by providing a 1 15 reasonable level of protection to persons engaged in animal 1 16 agricultural production from certain types of nuisance actions. 1 17 c. Declaration. The general assembly has balanced all 1 18 competing interests and declares its intent to preserve 1 19 and enhance responsible animal agricultural production, 1 20 specifically animal agricultural producers in this state 1 21 who use existing prudent and generally utilized management 1 22 practices reasonable for their animal feeding operations. 1 23 2. Except as otherwise provided by this section, an animal 1 24 feeding operation, as defined in section 459.102, found to 1 25 be a public or private nuisance under this chapter or under 1 26 principles of common law, or found to interfere with another 1 27 person's comfortable use and enjoyment of the person's life or 1 28 property under any other cause of action, shall be conclusively 1 29 presumed to be a permanent nuisance and not a temporary 1 30 or continuing nuisance under principles of common law, and 1 31 shall be subject to compensatory damages only as provided in 1 32 subsection 3. 1 33 3. Compensatory damages awarded to a person bringing 1 34 an action alleging that an animal feeding operation is a 1 35 public or private nuisance, or an interference with another 2 1 person's comfortable use and enjoyment of the person's life or 2 2 property under any other cause of action, shall not exceed the 2 3 following: 2 4 a. The person's share of compensatory property damages due 2 5 to any diminution in the fair market value of the person's real 2 6 property proximately caused by the animal feeding operation. 2 7 The fair market value of the real property is deemed to equal 2 8 the price that a buyer who is willing but not compelled to 2 9 buy and a seller who is willing but not compelled to sell 2 10 would accept for the real property. The person's share of any 2 11 compensatory property damages must be based on the person's 2 12 share of the ownership interest in the real property. For 2 13 purposes of this section, ownership interest means holding 2 14 legal or equitable title to real property in fee simple, as a 2 15 life estate, or as a leasehold interest. 2 16 b. The person's compensatory damages due to the person's 2 17 past, present, and future adverse health condition. This 2 18 determination shall be made utilizing only objective and 2 19 documented medical evidence that the nuisance or interference 2 20 with the comfortable use and enjoyment of the person's life or 2 21 property was the proximate cause of the person's adverse health 2 22 condition. 2 23 c. The person's compensatory special damages proximately 2 24 caused by the animal feeding operation, including without 2 25 limitation, annoyance and the loss of comfortable use and 2 26 enjoyment of real property. However, the total damages 2 27 awarded to a person who holds an ownership interest in the real 2 28 property for which damages are awarded under this paragraph "c" 2 29 shall not exceed one and one=half times the sum of any damages 2 30 awarded to the person for the person's share of the total 2 31 compensatory property damages awarded under paragraph "a" plus 2 32 any compensatory damages awarded to the person under paragraph 2 33 "b". 2 34 4. A person who alleges and fails to prove that an animal 2 35 feeding operation is a public or private nuisance under this 3 1 chapter or under principles of common law, or an interference 3 2 with another person's comfortable use and enjoyment of the 3 3 person's life or property under any other cause of action, 3 4 shall be liable to the person against whom the cause of action 3 5 was brought for all costs and expenses, including reasonable 3 6 attorney fees incurred in the defense of the animal feeding 3 7 operation as determined by the court. The costs and expenses 3 8 attributable to reasonable attorney fees shall be taxed as 3 9 court costs. 3 10 5. This section shall apply to an animal feeding operation 3 11 in the same manner as section 657.11, subsection 4. 3 12 6. This section shall not apply if the person bringing 3 13 the action proves that the public or private nuisance or 3 14 interference with another person's comfortable use and 3 15 enjoyment of the person's life or property under any other 3 16 cause of action is proximately caused by any of the following: 3 17 a. The failure to comply with a federal statute or 3 18 regulation or a state statute or rule which applies to the 3 19 animal feeding operation. 3 20 b. The failure to use existing prudent generally utilized 3 21 management practices reasonable for the animal feeding 3 22 operation. 3 23 7. This section does not apply to a person during the 3 24 time in which the person is classified as a habitual violator 3 25 pursuant to section 459.604. 3 26 8. This section does not apply to a cause of action that 3 27 accrued prior to the effective date of this Act. 3 28 Sec. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Act, being deemed of immediate 3 29 importance, takes effect upon enactment. 3 30 EXPLANATION 3 31 The inclusion of this explanation does not constitute agreement with 3 32 the explanation's substance by the members of the general assembly. 3 33 GENERAL. This bill allows for an affirmative defense to be 3 34 raised in certain cause of actions in which an animal feeding 3 35 operation is alleged to be a public or private nuisance or 4 1 to otherwise interfere with a person's comfortable use and 4 2 enjoyment of life or property. The cause of action may be 4 3 brought under Code chapter 657, which addresses private and 4 4 public nuisances, or under common law principles. 4 5 FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. The bill includes general assembly 4 6 findings that the public's interests are advanced by preserving 4 7 and encouraging responsible animal agricultural production, 4 8 and states the bill's purpose is to encourage persons involved 4 9 in animal agriculture to adopt existing prudent and generally 4 10 utilized management practices for their animal feeding 4 11 operations. 4 12 PRIVATE AND PUBLIC NUISANCE. An affirmative defense may be 4 13 raised if the allegation involves either a private or public 4 14 nuisance. A private nuisance occurs when a person (defendant) 4 15 uses the person's land in a manner that unreasonably or 4 16 substantially interferes with the enjoyment of another person 4 17 (plaintiff). A public nuisance unreasonably and substantially 4 18 interferes with the public's use and enjoyment of legal rights 4 19 common to the public. 4 20 PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY OR CONTINUING NUISANCES. If the 4 21 affirmative defense prevails, the animal feeding operation is 4 22 conclusively deemed to be a permanent rather than a temporary 4 23 or continuing nuisance. A temporary or continuing nuisance 4 24 refers to an injury that occurs intermittently and which may 4 25 be the basis for a number of actions for damages claimed by 4 26 the same party. A permanent nuisance is expected to continue 4 27 indefinitely and the award is for an amount equaling the total 4 28 resulting damages, including future damages that may result 4 29 from the nuisance as it then exists. 4 30 LIMITATION ON DAMAGES. The affirmative defense limits 4 31 compensatory damages as opposed to punitive damages proximately 4 32 caused by the animal feeding operation and specifies three 4 33 categories of awards, including (1) damages for any diminution 4 34 in the fair market value of a person's real property; (2) 4 35 damages due to a person's past, present, and future adverse 5 1 health condition based on medical evidence; and (3) special 5 2 damages for intangible injuries such as annoyance or the loss 5 3 of comfortable use and enjoyment of real property. In the case 5 4 of special damages, the total awarded cannot exceed one and 5 5 one=half times the combined amounts for property damages and 5 6 damages resulting from an adverse health condition. 5 7 COSTS. A party who alleges and fails to prove that an 5 8 animal feeding operation is a public or private nuisance is 5 9 liable to pay the other party all costs and expenses, including 5 10 reasonable attorney fees incurred in the defense. 5 11 DATE OF OPERATION. The affirmative defense may be raised 5 12 regardless of the established date of operation or expansion of 5 13 the animal feeding operation. 5 14 EXCLUSIONS. The affirmative defense is not available 5 15 in certain circumstances: (1) an animal feeding operation 5 16 failed to comply with an applicable federal or state statute 5 17 or regulation, (2) the animal feeding operation failed to 5 18 use existing prudent generally utilized management practices 5 19 reasonable for the animal feeding operation, (3) the animal 5 20 feeding operation is controlled by a person classified as a 5 21 habitual violator who has committed three or more environmental 5 22 violations, and (4) the cause of action arose before the bill's 5 23 effective date. 5 24 EFFECTIVE DATE. The bill takes effect upon enactment. LSB 1745HV (1) 87 da/rj
