By Wally Kennedy

wkennedy@joplinglobe.com

A Cedar County couple, Ed and Ruth McEowen, have received a record settlement of $1.1 million after filing a nuisance suit against the operators of a hog farm.

But, in another legal battle involving concentrated animal feeding operations, a court battle has ended after an appeal by a Barton County township to the Missouri Supreme Court has been denied.

The settlement from the Jerico Springs couple and the decision on the case filed by the Richland Township Board of Directors were both announced last week.

Cedar County case

In 1998, wooded land near the McEowens was cleared to construct a corporate hog farm to house 7,500 pigs. In 2005, the couple sued the operators of the hog farm.

Last week they learned of the settlement.

“This is basically an atomic bomb when it comes to this type of case,’’ said Charlie Speer, the Kansas City attorney who led a team of trial lawyers in representing the McEowens.

“There are over 400 nuisance cases like this one pending in Missouri, including 50 in Southwest Missouri,’’ Speer said. “This $1.1 million settlement sets the bar for future settlements.’’

The suit was filed against Missouri Farmers Association (MFA), which supplied the hogs, and its insurer, Missouri Farm Bureau. Also sued were North View Swine Co., Tri-County Swine and the contract growers, Douglas and Edith Mullings, who did not live near the hog CAFO.

The settlement prevents the hog farm from any future odor releases that might negatively impact the McEowens.

The case revealed that one of the six barns constructed for the hog CAFO was built without a required construction permit. The barns were built closer than 1,000 feet to the McEowen’s home in clear violation of regulations maintained by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources. The hog CAFO operated for six years without a permit.

Richland appeal denied

The Missouri Supreme Court will not hear an appeal from the board of directors of Richland Township in Barton County in connection with its pursuit of zoning regulations for hog CAFOs.

The board reapproached the Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, at Springfield, to ask the appellate judges to reconsider their decision striking down the township’s zoning regulations, or to transfer the case to the Missouri Supreme Court.

The township attempted to convince the Missouri Court of Appeals, in a hearing earlier this year, that the township has the right under state law to regulate land-use areas as they relate to concentrated animal feeding operations.

In a unanimous decision, a three-member panel of judges affirmed a lower court’s decision to deny injunctive relief to the township board. When the decision was handed down, township members believed an appeal to the Missouri Supreme Court was likely because the appellate court sided with the township on several points. But the court was unwilling to transfer the case to the Missouri Supreme Court.

The township board sued Kenoma LLC, the hog-farm operation, when it started work on a 2,400-hog farm in June 2007, alleging violation of township rules.

Kenoma is a farmer-owned company contracting with Synergy, a pork producer with offices in Lamar and Sully, Iowa. Kenoma raises nursery pigs to be finished in Iowa. Kenoma owns the structures and employs workers; Synergy owns the hogs.

The suit originally was heard in Barton County Circuit Court by Judge Carl Gum, who was appointed by the Missouri Supreme Court to preside in the case after Circuit Judge James Bickel bowed out because of a prior commitment.

Gum ruled in favor of Kenoma and against the Richland Township board.

According to Gum’s December 2007 ruling, the 2,400-hog farm has the right to operate, even if those operations violate the township’s zoning regulations. Gum cited a zoning exemption for “farm structures” in a 1997 Missouri Supreme Court decision in Premium Standard Farms Inc. vs. Lincoln Township of Putnam County.

The appellate court cited the Missouri Supreme Court decision involving Putnam County as the controlling factor in its affirmation of Gum’s decision. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that Lincoln Township’s zoning regulations attempted to regulate the farm structures housing confined hogs, and that a township board lacks statutory authority to regulate such structures.

Richland Township argued it was not attempting to regulate farm structures, but land-use areas. State law, the township board claimed, gave it the right to do that. In April 2007, 81 percent of the 206 Richland Township residents who cast ballots voted to adopt zoning regulations amid rumors that a large hog farm was moving into the community near Lamar.