By Lori EhdeThe Overgaard lawsuit has been officially closed, according to an agreement currently being drafted among the attorneys.For defendants Chad and Scott Overgaard, the agreement means an end to mounting legal bills."It’s kind of a load off to have it settled," Chad Overgaard said Tuesday. "But we’re still stuck with the legal fees."He wouldn’t say what the fees have totaled since the suit was first filed March 19, 2002, but he said he was getting worried."It was a substantial amount that affected us pretty good," he said. "It was to the point where we had to take out loans to do it."Glenn, Mabel, Loren and Mark Overgaard had sued Chad and Scott over their hog confinement operation just after it was built.Chad and Scott Overgaard weren’t the only defendants named in the suit. Also named were Overgaard Pork the business, former Rock County Feedlot Officer John Burgers, Rock County Board of Commissioners and Schwartz Farms, which owns the animals Overgaard Pork raises.Claims against County Commissioner Bob Jarchow had been filed, but were dismissed in March. The charges against the county were dismissed in federal court in July.Total defense fees estimated at nearly $150,000Total legal fees for the defendants named in the suit could amount to nearly $250,000, according to discussion at Tuesday's meeting of the Rock County Board."The sad thing about this is there was a time when we could have settled for a stipend, but you have to take it to the wall," said County Administrator Kyle Oldre.Commissioner Richard Bakken agreed."That’s the only way to make people considering frivolous lawsuits think twice about it," Bakken said.The county’s legal fees are paid, minus the deductible, by the Minnesota Counties Insurance Trust Fund.‘… up against formidable forces’According to the plaintiffs’ attorney, Jim Peters, the deep pockets of the County and Schwartz Farms were the ultimate reason for agreeing to drop the case."These people can’t continue to fight the unlimited resources of the County and Schwartz Farms Inc.," Peters said."This settlement is about a small family farm trying to fight what they perceive as a real problem. But they don’t have resources to continue the fight forever. They’re up against rather formidable forces."He went on to say the ordeal has taken an emotional toll on his clients. "It’s hard, emotionally, on these people to have these issues in the court," Peters said.BackgroundThe federal portion of the lawsuit against Chad and Scott was dismissed with prejudice, meaning they can’t be brought into state court.The state charges were also dismissed by the same federal judge without prejudice, so they could have been brought to state court if the plaintiffs hadn’t agreed to settle. The state charges are the claims such as nuisance, negligence and trespassing.The federal charges involved the accusation that the hog confinement permitting process was fraudulent or unfair.The plaintiffs were suing for monetary damages exceeding $50,000, which is standard.The lawsuit alleged that all defendants conspired to help Chad and Scott wrongfully obtain a hog feedlot permit to build a 3,200-head hog setup about a half mile from Glenn’s property in the fall of 2001.The suit claimed the defendants didn’t act according to law when permits for a feedlot were granted, which fell under the federal part of the lawsuit.Chad and Scott maintained all along they followed proper procedure."For what it cost to build the barn, we wouldn’t have done it without going through the process," Chad said. "We felt that we didn’t do anything wrong, and to get sued for it was frivolous."
