Omernick v. Department of Natural Resources
Wisconsin Supreme Court
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
- Omernik v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
- Nekoosa-Edwards Paper Co. v. Public Service CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
- Apfelbacher v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1918
- Denning v. City of Green BayWisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
3Cited by6 opinions
- In Re Water Use Permit ApplicationsHawaii Supreme Court · 2000
- Romey v. LandersSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
- State v. ZawistowskiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Metz v. Veterinary Examining BoardCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2007
- In Re Water Use Permit ApplicationsHawaii Supreme Court · 2000
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.