Laserfiche WebLink
1 79. As a result of the Federal Action, Defendants know.that Lima Ranch is operating <br /> 2 in compliance with WDR 2007-035, that the RWQCB is not investigating Lima Ranch, and that <br /> 3 groundwater analysis cannot conclusively identify the source of nitrate contribution. <br /> 4 80. Defendants also know or should have known that the state standard for MCL <br /> 5 pertains to drinking water standards and is only harmful when used for domestic purposes like <br /> 6 drinking water, not when such water is used for agricultural pgrposes. The drinking water <br /> 7 standards (in MCLS) are much higher than the standards for agricultural uses. The standard for <br /> 8 agricultural use depends on what type of crop the water is being applied to. <br /> 9 81. Defendants failed to use reasonable care to determine the truth or falsity of the <br /> 10 statements contained in the Fact Sheet. <br /> 11 82. Defendants willfully and maliciously published the aforementioned statement <br /> 12 with knowledge of their inaccuracy and the effect that they would have on their readers. <br /> 13 83. Defendants' defamatory statements have been substantial factors in making the <br /> 14 local community and various third parties think that Lima Ranch is operating in violation of the <br /> 15 law. <br /> 16 84. As a result of Defendants' actions, Lima Ranch, Jack Hamm, and Patricia <br /> 17 Hamm's reputations, business, property, profession, occupation and good will have bee <br /> 18 damaged in the local community and in the dairy industry. <br /> 19 85. As a further result of Defendants' defamatory statements, Lima Ranch, Jac <br /> 20 Hamm, and Patricia Hamm have suffered special damages, to date, including but not limited to <br /> 21 the diminished value of the dairy business and of the underlying property, and the diminishe <br /> 22 value of Lima Ranch's products in amounts to be determined by expert testimony at trial. <br /> 23 PRAYER FOR RELIEF <br /> 24 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek judgment against each Defendant as follows: <br /> 25 1. An order requiring Defendants to show cause, if any they have, why they should <br /> 26 not be enjoined as set forth in this Complaint, during the pendency of this action; <br /> 27 2. A temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, and a permanent <br /> 28 injunction, requiring Defendants, and each of them, and their agents, servants, an <br /> HERUM1.CRA67rREE <br /> 15 <br /> COMPLAINT FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER,PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT <br /> INJUNCTION,LIBEL PER SE,AND LIBEL PER QUOD <br />