Legal Opinion

Omernick v. Department of Natural Resources

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 10, 1976No. 161 (1974)PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtConnor T. Hansen, J.

The essence of the trial court’s decision on demurrer was that the plaintiffs had not exhausted their administrative remedies by applying for a permit under sec. 30.18, Stats. The trial court also ruled that sec. 30.18 limited the common law right of irrigation by a riparian owner. It held that the notice and hearing provisions under the statutes satisfied procedural due process. Inasmuch as the plaintiffs did not utilize the hearing procedure, the court ruled a justiciable controversy was not presented. On appeal, plaintiffs have raised two arguments. First, the designation of Holt Creek and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Omernik v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Nekoosa-Edwards Paper Co. v. Public Service CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Apfelbacher v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Denning v. City of Green BayWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. In Re Water Use Permit ApplicationsHawaii Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Romey v. LandersSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  3. State v. ZawistowskiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Metz v. Veterinary Examining BoardCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2007
  5. In Re Water Use Permit ApplicationsHawaii Supreme Court · 2000

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API