Laserfiche WebLink
1 violations during the three years preceding the complaint, for a total of$400,000. <br /> 2 C. Liability Pursuant To Fish & Game Code 45650.1 <br /> 3 Fish & Game Code section 5650.1 provides for a penalty where a person (1) "permit to <br /> 4 pass into, or place where it can pass into the waters of the state (2) any"substance or material <br /> 5 deleterious to fish, plant life or bird life". (Fish & Game Code section 5650(a)(6).) Here the <br /> 6 Defendants collected manure in a pond and corrals, but through a series of omissions and I <br /> 7 mismanagement, allowed the manure-containing runoff to leave the corrals and pond on <br /> 8 numerous occasions. The topographic map (Exhibit l.and IA], and testimony of Louis Pratt, <br /> 9 neighbors, and City of Tracy engineers all show that the area drains toward the San Joaquin <br /> 10 River through various ditches and irrigation district drains. The ditches,drains, and river are all <br /> 11 included in the broad interpretation given to the phrase "waters of the state." Finally, biologist <br /> 12 Michael Rugg testified that the wastewater was deleterious to fish. <br /> 13 Penalties under section 5650.1 can be imposed for each separate violation, and are <br /> 14 expressly "separate, and in addition to,any other civil penalty imposed" under other laws. Th <br /> 15 court should impose a$25,000 penalty under section 5650.1 for each of the fourteen violation <br /> 16 during the three years preceding the complaint, for a total of$350,000. <br /> 17 D. Liability Pursuant to Business & Professions Code 17200 <br /> 18 Business and Professions Code section 17200 imposes strict liability. It is not necessary <br /> 19 to show an intent to injure or knowledge that the activity is unlawful. (Hewlitt v. Squaw Valley <br /> 20 Ski Corp. (1997) 54 Cal.AppAth 499, 520.) The Legislature intended to permit courts to enjoin <br /> 21 ongoing wrongful business conduct in whatever context such activity might occur. (Stoiber v. <br /> 22 Honeychuck(1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 903, 927.) <br /> 23 Penalties under section 17206, of up to$2,500.00 per act, must be imposed for each <br /> 24 separate violation, and are cumulative remedies, indicating a legislative intent to allow double <br /> 25 penalties. (People v. Toomey (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d.1, 22.) This dairy has operated in a <br /> 26 nuisance condition continuously for the four years preceding the complaint, and that condition is <br /> • 27 a separate unfair business practice from the dozens of dates of off-property discharges, each <br /> 28 discharge of which violated three distinct statutory schemes. The Court should impose a$100 <br /> Plaintiffs Post-Trial Brief 16 . - <br />