JUDICIAL:

BRUNS v. Hagen, 2018 WL 6049643 (Ill.App. 5 Dist.) The facts giving rise to this appeal stem from a drainage dispute on real estate designated by surveys as section 33 of Breese Township, Clinton County, Illinois. The initial lawsuit was filed by Paul and Elizabeth Bruns (collectively Bruns) against defendant, David Hagen (Hagen), to enjoin Hagen from altering an existing levee and ditch system and from removing lateral support from the Bruns’ real estate. Specifically, the complaint states that prior to 2015, water naturally flowed from the Bruns’ real estate onto Hagen’s real estate. Sometime in 2015, the Bruns asserted that Hagen constructed or caused to be constructed a dam with a small tube which obstructed the natural flow of water from the Bruns’ real estate. In addition, the Bruns asserted that Hagen was in the process of constructing, by deepening and widening, ditches and berms which would obstruct the natural flow of water from the Bruns’ real estate and remove the lateral support to the Bruns’ real estate. The Bruns sought authorization to restore their natural drainage. The Bruns died during the pendency of the lawsuit. In 2017, plaintiffs, Bernard Bruns and Erin Hentz, were substituted as parties in this matter. Plaintiffs are the Bruns’ children and are the holders of the remainder interests in the Bruns’ land.The trial court’s order resolving a drainage dispute was affirmed where the court properly established the parameters of the mutual drain; the court properly afforded each party the opportunity to repair their respective portion of the mutual drain; and the court did not err in apportioning costs.
SunOpta Grains and Foods Inc. v. JNK Tech Inc. d/b/a SalitekCherith Agro, Inc. f/k/a JP Agro Trading, Inc., and Abraham T. “Tim” Kim, 2018 WL 6045262 (D.Minn.); 

Plaintiff SunOpta Grains and Foods, Inc. develops, produces, and supplies soybeans. Defendants JNK Tech, Inc. d/b/a Salitek (“JNK”) and Cherith Agro, Inc. (“Cherith”) are both founded, owned, and operated by Defendant Abraham T. “Tim” Kim. Kim founded JNK in 2006 to import big-screen televisions from China and Korea to the United States. He later attempted to repurpose JNK to export soybeans, eventually forming Cherith for that purpose instead. At the beginning of the parties’ dealings, Kim was still using JNK for his soybeantransactions.
In late 2015 and early 2016, SunOpta entered into two contracts for the sale of medium and small size soybeans to JNK. These contracts required germination rates of 85% for the medium soybeans and 90% for the small soybeans. SunOpta began attempting to fill Kim’s orders.  The suit arose after the defendant did not Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
ROGER D. PETERS, CARRIE A. PETERS, Claimants & Appellants, HELEN WELLBORN, WILLIAM R. WELLBORN, Claimants & Appellees. OBJECTOR: Hildreth Livestock Co., NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAR: Denhan Ranches, Inc., 2018 MT 279N; ¶2 Roger and Carrie Peters (Peters) appeal the order of the Water Court that adopted the Water Master’s Report dismissing Peters’ claim to 120 miner’s inches from Medicine Lodge Creek in the Red Rock River Basin (41A).We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c) of our Internal Operating Rules, which provides for memorandum opinions. In the opinion of the Court, the case presents a question controlled by settled law or by the clear application of applicable standards of review.
FARM AND GARDEN CENTER, L.L.C., APPELLEE, V. JIM KENNEDY, APPELLANT., 26 Neb. App. 576 (2018) Farm and Garden Center, L.L.C. (Farm & Garden), brought an action against Jim Kennedy on an unpaid balance for goods and services provided to him. Kennedy filed a counterclaim against Farm & Garden for damages based on “lost forage/ bales for the 2012 crop season,” which he claimed was the result of an improper application of chemicals and fertilizers by Farm & Garden. A jury returned a verdict of $104,180.27 in favor of Farm & Garden and a verdict of $7,511.20 in favor of Kennedy on his counterclaim. Kennedy filed a motion for new trial on his counterclaim, and Farm & Garden filed a motion for prejudgment interest. The trial court denied Kennedy’s motion for new trial and ordered Kennedy to pay Farm & Garden an additional $46,089.27 in prejudgment interest.
On appeal, Kennedy challenges the admission of Farm & Garden’s expert’s opinion, the award of prejudgment interest, the jury’s verdict on his counterclaim, and the denial of his motion for new trial. The court affirms the district court.
JAMES M. DAY, Petitioner, v.NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE, an agency within THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Respondent.2018 WL 6047414 (D.N.M.); This matter is before the Court on Petitioner-Appellant James M. Day’s Appellate Brief in Chief filed on June 30, 2016 pursuant to the judicial review provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 701–706.  The dispute between Day and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (“NRCS” or “Agency”) centers on whether NRCS properly terminated Day’s Conservation Stewardship Program (“CSP”) contract and required Day to repay $160,000 in program benefits that he received under the contract. See Joint Status Report. The Court found that NRCS acted in accordance with the law in determining that Day was required to refund all CSP payments made to him, and therefore affirms the Agency’s decision. The Court additionally affirms the National Appeals Division Director’s Determination that Day is not entitled to equitable relief.
CASCADIA WILDLANDS; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, a federal department; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Additional Party Names: Animal & Plant Health Inspection Servs.-Wildlife Servs., Ctr. for Biological Diversity, David Williams, Predator Def., Project Coyote, WildEarth Guardians, No. 17-35508, 2018 WL 5980575 (9th Cir. Nov. 14, 2018); The circuit court found that the district court correctly concluded that Wildlife Services’ decision to assist the State of Oregon in its removal of gray wolves was not a “major federal action” under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). “Under NEPA, federal agencies are required to prepare either an [Environmental Assessment (EA) ] or [Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) ] for major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.” . “There are no clear standards for defining the point at which federal participation transforms a state or local project into [a] major federal action. The matter is simply one of degree.” . The Circuit Court made this determination by considering: (1) the degree to which the given action is funded by the federal agency, and (2) the extent of the federal agency’s involvement and control in the action.  “ ‘Marginal’ federal action will not render otherwise local action federal.” . Neither Wildlife Services’ financial contribution to the Oregon Wolf Conservation and Management Plan (Oregon Wolf Plan or the Plan) nor its control over the Plan’s operation, alone or in combination, are sufficient to render its involvement a “major federal action.”
REGULATORY:
Notice and request for comments: Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA, In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations, the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is announcing its intention to collect information from stakeholders from industry, State and public health and agriculture departments with responsibilities for retail food safety, local health departments, and grocers to gather information on FSIS outreach efforts related to retail best practices to control Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) in retail delicatessens. The purpose of this information collection is to enhance Federal outreach and interagency coordination to control Lm at retail. Info HERE
Notice; request for comments; Farm Service Agency, USDA; In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Farm Service Agency (FSA) is requesting comments from all interested individuals and organizations on a revision and an extension of a currently approved information collection associated with the MS Records. Info HERE