Sik v. Verhelst Brothers, et al., No. A09-329, 2009 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1265 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 8, 2009)

(plaintiff claims that defendant (feedlot and farm) created nuisance by grinding hay in violation of county-issued conditional-use permit and that county's failure to enforce conditional-use permit constituted a taking; inverse condemnation claim fails as a matter of law because government did not physically conduct activity on plaintiff's property or regulate their property; no evidence existed that defendant in violation of conditional use permit; appropriate remedy would be mandamus action against county for failure to enforce conditional use permit and/or private nuisance action against defendant). 

CALT does not provide legal advice. Any information provided on this website is not intended to be a substitute for legal services from a competent professional. CALT's work is supported by fee-based seminars and generous private gifts. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in the material contained on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of Iowa State University.

RSS​ Facebook Twitter