>Idaho Grass Burning Settlement
Date Filed: June 10, 2002
Court: State Court
Location: Idaho

The Idaho Grass Burning class action concluded on January 31, 2006 with Judge John Mitchell's final approval of the settlement.

The settlement includes approximately $600,000 to be divided among class members who submitted a claim form by December 30, 2005. The amount each person will receive is based on one's medical diagnosis and number of days impacted by smoke during the burn season. For additional details, please review the proposed Plan of Allocation.

Please read the Settlement Notice on the right-hand side of the page for additional information and answers to frequently asked questions.

If you have additional questions about the settlement, please contact Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro at (206) 623-7292.

Case Background

Hagens Berman filed the class-action suit on behalf of a group of Idaho residents against the state's grass-burning policy in 2002, claiming the practice endangers the health of thousands, especially those with respiratory conditions.

The suit called for an immediate end to grass burning, and alleged that Idaho's burn policy, which allows grass-seed farmers to burn in excess of 20,000 acres every year, lags far behind other states - including neighboring Washington - which has effectively outlawed grass burning altogether.

The suit also called for the creation of a medical monitoring and education program to protect Idaho residents confronted with grass burning smoke every August and September. Seeking to protect those most affected by the grass burning pollutants, the suit represented individuals with cystic fibrosis, chronic heart disease or a medically diagnosed inflammatory airwave disease such as asthma or chronic bronchitis who live in Kootenai, Bonner, Benewah and Spokane Counties, as well as other areas.


Recent Developments

January 31, 2006 - The proposed settlement agreement was approved by Judge John Mitchell, closing the case.

Note: Class Members must take action by December 30, 2005 to be included in the settlement disbursement.

June 4, 2003 - Idaho State Court District Judge John T. Mitchell ruled that a recently passed state law giving Idaho grass-growers broad exemption from trespass and nuisance laws during field burning is unconstitutional. The law, passed in the last session of the Idaho state legislature, was part of a long-fought legal battle between grass growers and a group of individuals who suffer significant health effects from the smoke due to respiratory conditions.

Read the press release and the court order for more information.

April 28, 2003 - Idaho District Judge John T. Mitchell gave the go-ahead for a class-action lawsuit filed against grass growers and the state of Idaho to proceed. Now certified as a class, the suit represents anyone suffering from inflammatory airway conditions have lived in Bonner, Benewah, Boundary, Kootenai or Spokane counties at any time in the last three years.

April 10, 2003 - In response to bills recently passed in the Idaho legislature, Hagens Berman filed a suit on behalf of Northern Idaho residents against the State of Idaho intended to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation.

House Bill 391 shifts the burden of damages for grass burning from farmers to taxpayers, effectively giving grass farmers a safe harbor against any damages that may result from grass burning. The legislature is expected to pass the bill in the coming days, and Governor Kempthorne is expected to sign it into law.

Attorney Steve Berman noted that while HB 391 passed through the House and Senate, legislators received several warnings about the constitutionality of the legislation, including a warning from the Idaho attorney general. The legislators were also warned that similar laws have been overturned in other states.

April 3, 2003 - Attorney Brent Walton testified in the Idaho Senate on the proposed grass burning legislation, describing the human and economic costs of Idaho House Bill 391.

December 2, 2002 - Hagens Berman filed a motion on behalf of the plaintiffs asking the court to include punitive damages as part of their claim against grass farmers.

According to Idaho law, punitive damages can only be included in a suit with a judge's approval. If approved, the motion will allow a jury to decide the amount of punitive damages against the grass farmers, if any, should the case move to trial.

September 13, 2002 - After the Idaho State Supreme Court overruled an Idaho state court's restrictions on grass-burning, Hagens Berman filed an motion on behalf of the plaintiffs to modify the original injunction to fit the within the Supreme Court's recommendation.

In overruling the Idaho District Court, Supreme Court Chief Justice Linda Trout noted that "the injunction ordered by the District Court on August 30, 2002 exceeds in some respects the District Court's jurisdiction." Chief Justice Trout made the ruling without prejudice, allowing both the State Supreme Court and the District Court to consider the grass-burning issue further.

Read the State Supreme Court's Ruling and the Plaintiffs' Response to the Supreme Court Ruling in the right-hand column for more information.

August 30, 2002 - An Idaho state court judge today imposed a tough set of restrictions on grass burning while a lawsuit brought by a group of Idaho residents moves through the court system. The order includes all grass farmers in Idaho, and will stay in effect until Dec. 31, 2002 or until a decision is reached on the lawsuit.

In an effort to protect Idaho citizens who are severely affected by the grass burning, Judge Mitchell ordered that every farmer must bale all loose straw and other residue from the ground before the fields can be burned. Grass burning can only commence once a smoke management coordinator or a local smoke coordinator certifies that material has been removed.

The order also requires the defendants in the lawsuit, 79 Idaho grass farmers, to post a $100,000 bond to cover possible healthcare costs and moving expenses for the plaintiffs in the suit.

August 19, 2002 - Idaho Judge John Mitchell gave residents of Couer d'Alene who are fighting to stop the state's annual practice of grass-burning a huge boost when he dismissed each of the defendants' motions to dismiss the case. Read the Court Order Dismissing Defendants' Motion to Dismiss in the right-hand column for more information.

The ruling, issued late today, allows the residents to move forward with the lawsuit, which demands an immediate end to grass burning and calls for the creation of a medical monitoring and education program to protect Idaho residents confronted with grass burning smoke every August and September.

The judge denied each of the defendants four motions, stating "when you balance simple economics issues on one side of the scale, with health and life issues on the other side of the scale, it is easy to see where the scales of justice will tip."

The judge has yet to rule on the plaintiff's motion for a injunction to prohibiting the grass fires, stating that ruling will be forthcoming.

July 25, 2002 - Hagens Berman filed a motion on behalf of the plaintiffs asking for an immediate temporary ban against grass burning while the class-action lawsuit works its way through the court system.




submit to reddit Join me on the New Digg