By Mary Hightower
University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture

Fast Facts

  • Parties ask for an expedited appeal of nearly $44 million settlement in Oklahoma
  • The 10th Circuit stayed the December 2025 judgement
  • Poultry litter, water quality case originally filed in 2005
A headshot of a smiling woman with fair skin and dark brown hair that falls to her shoulders. She is wearing dangling silver earrings, a vibrant blue collared button-down shirt, and a dark grey pinstriped blazer. The background is a soft, warm neutral gradient that transitions from a light beige to a slightly darker brown on the left side.

Elizabeth Rumley of the National Agricultural Law Center gives a breakdown of the most recent moves in the long-running Illinois River case. (UADA image)

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. — A filing asking an Oklahoma federal judge to open the path to a settlement over water quality in the Illinois River carries with it the weight of a decades-long battle, pleading for an expedited ruling that would “end this case once and for all.”

Tuesday’s filing asks U.S. District Judge Gregory Frizzell of the Northern District of Oklahoma to vacate his December 2025 ruling that held poultry corporations responsible for pollution in the river, required them to fund decades of cleanup and imposed restrictions on poultry litter applications.

“The parties have asked for an expedited appeal,” said Elizabeth Rumley, a senior staff attorney at the National Agricultural Law Center. “Judge Frizzell will now consider whether this new settlement, with all parties, is enough to resolve the case.”

On Aug. 17, the Denver-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit paused Frizzell’s ruling, but the appeals court declined to vacate the decision. All parties to the case have signed on to a proposed $44 million settlement of the water quality battle that Frizzell will now consider.

The parties had been given until Sept. 30 to file a motion but beat the deadline by filing Sept. 22.

“After two decades of hard-fought litigation, including two trials, multiple evidentiary hearings, multiple mediations, and a final judgment followed by seven notices of appeal, a flurry of post-judgment motions, and five more notices of appeal, everyone has had enough,” the filing said.

The 10th Circuit’s decision, “permitting the parties to seek vacatur ‘based on new circumstances that [this Court] has never considered — a settlement agreement entered into by all parties … The court should grant the motion, vacate the judgment and allow the parties’ settlement to end this case once and for all,” the filing said.

To read the full news article, click here.

Share: