HB 1091 would allow the owner of land used for agricultural operations used for maintaining a nuisance to recover attorney’s fees and punitive damages if the court determines that the action was “frivolous, initiated maliciously, or groundless.”
There is also a provision in the legislation that would allow the owner of property on which agricultural operations are conducted to detain a person on the person’s property who the owner has probable cause to believe is manufacturing meth.
I guess my main issue with this legislation is that I don’t see any strong reason to make it specific to people with agricultural land. If it’s good policy for them, it’s probably good policy for anyone.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
What are Indiana’s laws, or lack thereof, regarding citizens arrest? I’d think they would apply in this situation.
Would this apply if a neighbor that was being subjected to the smells and pollution from the fecal matter runoff into water and the court deemed it frivolous they would have to pay the fees? In other words, would it deter neighbors of farms due recourse?
I think so. And, while I can’t say for sure, I suspect that’s mostly the point of the legislation.
Shouldn’t there be a law against making a law under false pretenses? ;-)