Ag Docket Blog
The Kansas Supreme Court recently disbarred a lawyer. It wasn’t the first disbarment of the year, and it likely won’t be the last.[i] The case of In re Rankin, however, may be the most head shaking. It’s a case study of a lawyer who apparently did not believe that the rules applied to him.
They wasted no time. The day the new Clean Water Rule was officially published, June 29, 2015, the lawsuits began. As of today, 27 states have joined lawsuits challenging the validity of the new Rule unveiled May 27 by the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Federal Judge Susan Mollway has struck down a Maui County Ordinance banning GMO crops. "A Bill Placing a Moratorium on the Cultivation of Genetically Modified Engineered Organisms" was passed by ballot initiative on November 4, 2014. Litigation over the Ordinance ensued immediately.
Mistakes happen. Sometimes mistakes lead to legal liability, as in the case of negligence. But sometimes, where it’s apparent that a mistake in an instrument was a mutual one, equity steps in to “reform” the mistake. No harm. No foul. The document is reformed to reflect the true intent of the parties. A recent case from the Iowa Court of Appeals demonstrates the application of this doctrine.
A recent opinion from the Iowa Court of Appeals reminds us of the importance of written plans for family farming businesses.
On January 20, 2015, Dakota Access, LLC, filed with the Iowa Utilities Board a petition for a hazardous liquid pipeline permit.
A recent case from the Iowa Court of Appeals reminds us that in order to acquire title to the property of another through a prescriptive easement (a non-exclusive form of adverse possession), the plaintiff must strictly prove the elements of the claim. In this case, the plaintiff proffered no such proof.
The Minnesota Department of Revenue announced special relief last week for poultry producers in Minnesota who were impacted by the H5N2 avian influenza outbreak. The Department announced that these producers will not be assessed penalties or interest if the outbreak prevented them from filing state returns or paying state taxes on time.
A recent Fifth Circuit opinion established that a federal court has jurisdiction to review the EPA’s denial of a rulemaking petition. It did, however, go on to establish a “highly deferential” standard of review, placing upon the agency only a “slight” burden to justify its decision to decline a necessity determination.
Financial stress in agriculture creates numerous legal issues. One of those that may not necessarily be high on the “radar screen” involves the purchasing of machinery and equipment. Does it matter if the purchase is from a private party or an implement dealer? It just might. There are at least a couple of common scenarios to watch out for.
The Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation 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. The Center'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.