Supreme Court rejects pesticide trespass

  • Article by: JOSEPHINE MARCOTTY , Star Tribune
  • Updated: August 1, 2012 - 9:55 PM

State's justices said the organic farmers plaintiff can sue for negligence over contaminated crops.

  • 20
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
liberaleliteAug. 1, 1212:33 PM

I can't comprehend how the Supreme Court ruled this way. One person infringing on another person's private property rights.

andersod62Aug. 1, 1212:54 PM

Are you kidding me..., I hope the Organic farmers are paying for the lawyers fee's for both sides. More frivolous law suits....

jaw99Aug. 1, 1212:58 PM

Monsanto wins again. No organic food for you! This is just plain wrong.

EleanoreAug. 1, 1212:58 PM

Did A act in a manner that impacted the physical property of B? That would be trespass I'm a'thinkin. But in an occupied land where corporations are people, constitutionas only apply to those a select eliete says they do, and taxation is based on your ability to hide assetts and income, that must not be the case. I'd hope we're intelligent enoguh to clean up this degenerated society with a little common sense and justice. Maybe it will take something more, but it is not possible to continue down this path and still have anything like a United States based upon our standards and principals.

stoneageAug. 1, 12 1:18 PM

Shameful! Someone disrupts business and alters your product and they aren't libel?

mnfishAug. 1, 12 1:27 PM

Actually andersod62, they aren't kidding you and this was a great case which is why it made it to the Supreme Court and was presented to the bench. Explain this to me if you disagree that pesticide drift is trespassing.......How can seed producers claim that genetic drift (the passing of genetic plant traits from one field to another) is considered patent infringement? If I farm next to a guy who uses Round Up ready beans for 10 years, while I plant my own home grown bean seed; and after 10 years my bean crop has taken on the Round Up Ready genetic trait, I'm all of a sudden breaking the law. Interesting and simply proof that those with money will stay protected by our laws. Genetic Drift, Pesticide Drift, why two different outcomes in the eyes of the law?

althoffdAug. 1, 12 1:52 PM

Lets make this easy for everyone to understand... if I spray for Misqutoes in my back yard and that spray Slash wind goes into Neighbor’s yard and they follow organic lifestyle they say I am Trasspassing with my Spray... how can I stop a drift to happen?

EleanoreAug. 1, 12 1:52 PM

"Genetic Drift, Pesticide Drift, why two different outcomes in the eyes of the law?" - Outstanding question. My guess is it has something to do with the defacto owners of justice in america today, as opposed to any constitutionally based standard of law and justice. But I'm just an unsupported voice here.

Grin0048Aug. 1, 12 1:53 PM

stoneage: who said they won't be found liable in some way? This court ruling didn't...this report didn't...what am I missing?

hermanocleasAug. 1, 12 2:03 PM

You gotta imagine the Organic Farm has a case against the other farm. Every farm should be responsible for what they choose to use on the crops they sell and for what drifts into adjacent land they don't own. If not, the Organic farm should just spray a strong plant killer on their, now worthless, crops on a day the wind blows towards the other farm and see how they like losing some $$$$$$$. ;-)


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters






question of the day

Poll: Can the Wild rally to win its playoff series against Colorado?

Weekly Question