Chapter 8 Updates: Remedies and Enforcement
§ 8.01b (1) Takings Law - Physical Takings, p. 261.
See also, Waller v. American Transmission Co. LLC, 2013 WI 77, 350 Wis.2d 242 833 N.W.2d 764, discussing the application of “uneconomic remnant” provisions of the state condemnation law.
§ 8.02a(3) Contested Case Hearings, p. 270.
In Clean Water Action Council of Northeast Wisconsin v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2014 WI Ap ___ 2013AP2112 (April 29, 2014) the court reaffirmed that the contested case hearing requirements under Wis. Stat. § 283.63 were required before a person could bring a challenge in circuit court.
In 2015 Wis. Act 391 a new provision was created to allow for substitution of a hearing examiner. See, Wis. Stat. § 227.445.
§ 8.02a(4) Judicial Review -- Scope of Review p. 274.
2015 Wis. Act 391 created a new provision in Wis. Stat. § 227.57(11) limiting agency deference as follows: "Upon review of an agency action or decision affecting a property owner's use of the property owner's property, the court shall accord no deference to the agency's interpretation of law if the agency action or decision restricts the property owner's free use of the property owner's property."
§ 8.03b(2) State Enforcement Proceedings - Restitution and Injunction, p. 285.
In State v. CGIP Lake Partners LLP, 2013 WI App 122, 351 Wis. 2d 100, 839 N.W. 2d 136, the court held that once a wetland violation is proven, the defendant has the burden to establish compelling equitable
reasons not to grant injunctive relief citing Forest County v. Goode, 219 Wis. 2d 654, 579 N.W.2d 715
(1998). The court remanded the case with directions to grant the injunction for wetland restoration.
§ 8.01b (1) Takings Law - Physical Takings, p. 261.
See also, Waller v. American Transmission Co. LLC, 2013 WI 77, 350 Wis.2d 242 833 N.W.2d 764, discussing the application of “uneconomic remnant” provisions of the state condemnation law.
§ 8.02a(3) Contested Case Hearings, p. 270.
In Clean Water Action Council of Northeast Wisconsin v. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2014 WI Ap ___ 2013AP2112 (April 29, 2014) the court reaffirmed that the contested case hearing requirements under Wis. Stat. § 283.63 were required before a person could bring a challenge in circuit court.
In 2015 Wis. Act 391 a new provision was created to allow for substitution of a hearing examiner. See, Wis. Stat. § 227.445.
§ 8.02a(4) Judicial Review -- Scope of Review p. 274.
2015 Wis. Act 391 created a new provision in Wis. Stat. § 227.57(11) limiting agency deference as follows: "Upon review of an agency action or decision affecting a property owner's use of the property owner's property, the court shall accord no deference to the agency's interpretation of law if the agency action or decision restricts the property owner's free use of the property owner's property."
§ 8.03b(2) State Enforcement Proceedings - Restitution and Injunction, p. 285.
In State v. CGIP Lake Partners LLP, 2013 WI App 122, 351 Wis. 2d 100, 839 N.W. 2d 136, the court held that once a wetland violation is proven, the defendant has the burden to establish compelling equitable
reasons not to grant injunctive relief citing Forest County v. Goode, 219 Wis. 2d 654, 579 N.W.2d 715
(1998). The court remanded the case with directions to grant the injunction for wetland restoration.
