State v. Brennco, Inc.
2015 Ohio 467
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- Brennco, Inc. operates a hog farm and grain production in Allen County, Ohio.
- On November 11, 2011, Brennco applied hog manure using a traveling gun applicator onto a field, resulting in manure entering Pigeon Run and the Auglaize River and causing a fish kill.
- June 10, 2013, the State filed a complaint in Lima Municipal Court charging Brennco with water pollution under R.C. 6111.04(A)(1) (misdemeanor, penalty up to $25,000 per day).
- Brennco moved to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and to suppress evidence claiming R.C. 6111.04(F)(3) exempted its conduct; the trial court denied both motions, Brennco entered a no contest plea, and was convicted.
- Brennco appealed challenging (1) jurisdiction, (2) the applicability of the F(3) exemption, and (3) the potential for lenity in favor of Brennco.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does R.C. 1901.17 limit the Lima Municipal Court’s jurisdiction here? | Brennco argues 1901.17 precludes criminal cases with fines up to $25,000. | Brennco asserts the monetary limit governs civil cases only and divests criminal jurisdiction. | Municipal court has criminal jurisdiction; 1901.17 does not divest for criminal cases. |
| Does R.C. 6111.04(F)(3) exempt the discharge here from liability? | Brennco contends it falls within the farming activities exception and no permit is required. | State contends no exemption applies because the discharge was not a permissible agricultural activity under the CWA. | No exemption; the discharge is not an agricultural stormwater discharge exempt from liability. |
| Did the trial court properly apply the farming exception in light of the Clean Water Act? | Brennco argues ambiguity should favor exemption under (F)(3) when farming activities are involved. | State contends the statutory text is clear and the discharge falls outside the exemption. | Statutory language is clear; exemption does not apply in this case. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Straley, 139 Ohio St.3d 339 (2014-Ohio-2139) (de novo statutory interpretation; determine legislative intent)
- State v. Pariag, 137 Ohio St.3d 81 (2013-Ohio-4010) (de novo statutory interpretation; determine legislative intent)
- State v. Cowan, 101 Ohio St.3d 372 (2004-Ohio-1583) (municipal courts’ criminal jurisdiction; statutory framework)
- State v. McLaughlin, 109 Ohio App.3d 868 (9th Dist.1996) (pollution as misdemeanor; municipal court jurisdiction)
- State ex rel. Johnson v. Franklin Cty. Mun. Court, 2014-Ohio-3308 (10th Dist. Franklin No. 14AP-219) (mandamus; interpretation of municipal court jurisdiction)
- Concerned Area Residents for The Env’t v. Southview Farm, 34 F.3d 114 (2d Cir.1994) (agricultural stormwater discharge exception under CWA)