Today the appeal for Scenic Pit LLC case against the Village of Richfield was heard in the Court of Appeals – District II, in Waukesha.
Attorneys for both sides Scenic Pit LLC and the Village of Richfield were in attendance. Each side had 30 timed minutes to present their case. Scenic Pit attorney spoke first, followed by the attorney for the Village of Richfield, after which the Scenic Pit attorney had a 5 minute rebuttal.
Attorneys for both sides Scenic Pit LLC and the Village of Richfield were in attendance. Each side had 30 timed minutes to present their case. Scenic Pit attorney spoke first, followed by the attorney for the Village of Richfield, after which the Scenic Pit attorney had a 5 minute rebuttal.
The Court of Appeals – District II is comprised of three judges, Chief Judge Lisa S. Neubauer, Presiding Judge Paul F. Reilly, and Judge Brian K. Hagedorn. Various Richfield residents attended and when the hearing ended everyone in attendance left.
While I am not an attorney I hope to summarize what I heard and understood. Some of the information may be limited as I did not know all the words or definitions used by attorneys and judges.
The brief presented by Scenic Pit LLC focused on Derosso Landfill Company, Inc. v. City of Oak Creek filed May 13, 1996 as well as another case WILLOW CREEK RANCH, L.L.C., Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner, v. TOWN OF SHELBY, County of La Crosse 4 years later, decided June 20, 2000.
Derosso Landfill Company, Inc. v. City of Oak Creek seemed to focus on licensing of the operation of a land fill while WILLOW CREEK RANCH, L.L.C., Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner, v. TOWN OF SHELBY, County of La Crosse seemed to focus on regulating the zoning of Willow Creek's game bird farm.
During the court preceding each of the judges asked questions of both attorneys. Questions seemed to focus on how the Scenic Pit LLC case related to these 2 other cases and whether the Village of Richfield had authority to regulate zoning which includes clean fill sites or if the DNR has precedent authority over the village zoning.
It seemed these two prior cases may not have fully explained a situation as has occurred here in Richfield. Perhaps a decision by the Appeal Court would further clarify the Derosso Landfill Company, Inc. v. City of Oak Creek in similar yet different situations.
It seemed the judges also discussed if there was authority to refer the case back to the Washington County Court.
The final decision will be announced within the next 4-6 months.
While I am not an attorney I hope to summarize what I heard and understood. Some of the information may be limited as I did not know all the words or definitions used by attorneys and judges.
The brief presented by Scenic Pit LLC focused on Derosso Landfill Company, Inc. v. City of Oak Creek filed May 13, 1996 as well as another case WILLOW CREEK RANCH, L.L.C., Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner, v. TOWN OF SHELBY, County of La Crosse 4 years later, decided June 20, 2000.
Derosso Landfill Company, Inc. v. City of Oak Creek seemed to focus on licensing of the operation of a land fill while WILLOW CREEK RANCH, L.L.C., Plaintiff-Appellant-Petitioner, v. TOWN OF SHELBY, County of La Crosse seemed to focus on regulating the zoning of Willow Creek's game bird farm.
During the court preceding each of the judges asked questions of both attorneys. Questions seemed to focus on how the Scenic Pit LLC case related to these 2 other cases and whether the Village of Richfield had authority to regulate zoning which includes clean fill sites or if the DNR has precedent authority over the village zoning.
It seemed these two prior cases may not have fully explained a situation as has occurred here in Richfield. Perhaps a decision by the Appeal Court would further clarify the Derosso Landfill Company, Inc. v. City of Oak Creek in similar yet different situations.
It seemed the judges also discussed if there was authority to refer the case back to the Washington County Court.
The final decision will be announced within the next 4-6 months.
RSS Feed
