Summary of a Recent
Judicial Development in
Pesticides

Action for Negligence Precludes Summary Judgment

Bhargavi Motukuri
National AgLaw Center Graduate Assistant

Summary of Decision

In Kleiss v. Bozdech, 811 N.E.2d 330 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004) the Illinois Appellate Court held that a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether a neighbor's spraying of herbicide damaged other farmers' crops and whether the neighbor breached the duty of care he owed to the other farmers when he sprayed the herbicide, thereby precluding summary judgment.

Background

Plaintiffs Barry and Robert Kleiss, d/b/a Kleiss Produce Farms, owned and farmed land located approximately two miles from a farm owned by defendant William Bozdech. See id. at 331. The plaintiffs filed a complaint against the defendant alleging that his use of the herbicide 2, 4-D caused damage to their crops. See id. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. See id. at 332. The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment and the plaintiffs appealed to the Illinois Appellate Court. See id. at 332.

Arguments

The plaintiffs argued that the trial court erred in granting the defendant a summary judgment because a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether spraying 2, 4-D caused the damage and as to whether the defendant breached the duty of care it owed when it sprayed the herbicide. See id. at 340.

Analysis and Holding

The court ruled that the trial court's granting of summary judgment was improper. See id. The court examined the facts of the case and determined that a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether the defendants spraying damaged the plaintiffs crops and as to whether defendant breached the duty of care it owed when spraying the herbicide. It therefore reversed the trial courts decision and remanded the matter for further proceedings.

The case was decided on June 9, 2004; this summary was posted Mar. 21, 2005.