Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Natural Resources — storm water violations — summary judgment — wetland fill violations

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//March 12, 2013//

Natural Resources — storm water violations — summary judgment — wetland fill violations

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//March 12, 2013//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Natural Resources — storm water violations — summary judgment — wetland fill violations

Steven Hanson and Hanson Management, Inc., (collectively, Hanson) appeal a summary judgment in favor of the State on its claims of illegal wetland fill and disturbing more than one acre of land without a storm permit, contrary to Wis. Stat. §§ 281.36(2) (2009-10) and 283.33, respectively. Hanson argues summary judgment procedure is not available for complex forfeiture actions involving §§ 281.36(2) and 283.33. He also asserts that, even if summary judgment is available, the circuit court erred in its grant of summary judgment because it improperly determined his response to the State’s summary judgment motion was untimely and it did not employ the proper summary judgment methodology. Finally, Hanson argues the circuit court erred in its imposition of an alternative jail sentence for failure to pay the forfeitures. The State cross-appeals, arguing the circuit court erred as a matter of law by imposing forfeitures against only one defendant, instead of both.

We conclude summary judgment procedure is not available for the Wis.

Stat. § 283.33 storm water violation. We therefore reverse judgment on the storm water violation and remand for further proceedings. As for the Wis. Stat. § 281.36(2) illegal wetland fill violation, we conclude Hanson’s response to the State’s summary judgment motion was not untimely. We also cannot determine what materials the court considered in making its summary judgment determination, and therefore reverse judgment on the wetland fill violation and remand for further proceedings. This opinion will not be published.

2012AP471 State v. Hanson

Dist III, Polk County, Galewyrick, J., Hoover, P.J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Williams, Owen R., Amery; For Respondent: Batt, Mary D., Madison; Steffen, Daniel P., Balsam Lake

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests