792 N.W.2d 656
Iowa2010Background
- Dalarna Farms filed a nuisance action against Access Energy Coop. over stray voltage allegedly affecting a New London dairy operation.
- The petition includes two nuisance-based counts: past/present damages and an injunction to abate the nuisance.
- Iowa amended §657.1(2) to allow a comparative fault defense for electric utilities in nuisance abatement actions if standards/permits are met.
- District court treated the defense as potentially applicable only to future damages in lieu of injunctive relief, not all damages.
- The court granted interlocutory review to interpret the statute and assess constitutionality and practicality of the defense.
- The Supreme Court reverses and remands, holding the defense may apply in nuisance actions for damages, but not to diminution in value damages.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope of §657.1(2) defense in nuisance actions | Access Energy: defense applies to all damages | Dalarna: defense limited to injunctive actions | Defense applies in nuisance actions for damages if standards/permits are met |
| Constitutional takings risk under the statute | Dalarna: defense could unjustly reduce damages | Access Energy: constitutionality not precluded | Takings issue avoided by limiting effect on diminution in value damages |
| Workability of applying comparative fault in nuisance cases | Dalarna: difficult to compare different fault types | Access Energy: workable with §668.3 guides | Court finds workable with proper jury instructions and context |
| Constitutional inalienable rights challenge | Dalarna: potential undue burden | Access Energy: appropriate regulatory balance | Balancing requires factual record; not decided pretrial |
Key Cases Cited
- Martins v. Interstate Power Co., 652 N.W.2d 657 (Iowa 2002) (nuisance under strict and nuisance theories; pure nuisance may exist without negligence; legislature responded with §657.1(2))
- Bormann v. Board of Supervisors, 584 N.W.2d 309 (Iowa 1998) (constitutional takings concerns in nuisance immunity statutes; easement value as measure of taking)
- Gacke v. Pork Xtra, L.L.C., 684 N.W.2d 168 (Iowa 2004) (immunity statutes may be saved by constitutional interpretation; takings concerns explained)
- Weinhold v. Wolff, 555 N.W.2d 454 (Iowa 1996) (nuisance damages and factors for determining interference; measure of damages for permanent nuisance)
- State ex rel. Bd. of Pharmacy Exam’rs v. McEwen, 250 Iowa 721 (Iowa 1959) (statutory interpretation guidance; examine whole statute including title)