State of Maine v. Winterwood Acres, Inc.

Opinion

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION YORK, ss. DOCKET NO. CVT6-339 :.b L ) / J ~ ;- L2 4 ,,"

STATE OF MAINE, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONWlENTAL PROTECTION,

Plaintiff

ORDER

WINTERWOOD ACRES, INC., WINTERWOOD FARMS, LLC and BELTIE, INC.,

Defendants

This is a Rule 80K, M.R.Civ.P. action whereby the State seeks both injunctive

relief and monetary sanctions for alleged violations of Maine's Water Pollution Control

Act, 38 M.R.S.A. g413 and other environmental protection statutes. The Defendants

have requested a jury trial and the State has moved to remand to the District Court,

asserting that, because it seeks primarily injunctive relief, the Defendants do not have a

right to jury trial.

In its memorandum, the State argues that the issue is controlled by Department of

Environmental Protection v. Emerson, 616 A.2d 1268 (Me. 1992), but does not address the

effect of the more recent case of City of Biddeford v. Holland, 2005 Me. 121, 886 A.2d 1281

on the issue sub judice. The Defendants argue that the Holland case controls the issue,

but they do not address the Emerson case, wherein a civil sanction of $191,000 was

imposed, as well as substantial injunctive relief.

Because the Law Court does not explicitly overrule Emerson in Holland, and

because the availability of a jury trial in fairly complicated environmental cases marks a significant change from past procedure, I request that the parties file supplemental

memoranda addressing the issue of whether Holland overrules Emerson sub silentio.

May I request that the parties respond by March 9,2007. At the direction of the Court, this Order shall be incorporated into the docket r f erenc Rule 79(a) 8xtecf: February 9 ,2007

Justice, Superior Court

Carol A. Blasi,AAG - PL Laura K.S. Welles, AAG - PL Michael I. Montembeau, Esq. - DEF