Summary of a Recent
Judicial Development in
Agriculture and Urbanization

Pollution Control Law Does Not Provide for
Private Right of Action
Against Hog Farm

Ross H. Pifer
National AgLaw Center Graduate Assistant

In In re Moore, 310 B.R. 795 (Bankr. N.D. Miss. 2004), the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Mississippi dismissed a nuisance claim filed against several hog farms. The plaintiffs' cause of action against the hog farms "included violations of the Mississippi Air and Water Pollution Control Law," and the court stated that "[t]he question of whether a private right of action exist[ed] under [this statute was] an issue of first impression in Mississippi." Id. at 798. In determining whether the statute provided a private right of action, the court explained the general rule "that the party claiming the right of action must establish a legislative intent, express or implied, to impose liability for violations of that statute." Id. at 799 (citation omitted). After "thoroughly review[ing]" the statute, the court found that "it clearly [did] not provide a private right of action or a private remedy for those persons adversely affected by air or water pollution." Id. at 800. Instead, the court stated that the statute "provide[d] the mechanism for a person or entity, affected by air or water pollution, to bring the matter before 'the commission' for redress." Id. Therefore, the plaintiffs' cause of action against the hog farms was dismissed. See id. at 802.

The case was decided on June 21, 2004; this summary was posted June 10, 2005.