Represented a leading livestock producer, who was sued by 21 nearby residents -- many of whom had operated their own livestock operations, claiming that the Defendant's newest facility was a public and private nuisance.  The complaint alleged that dust, noise, gases such as hydrogen sulfide and ammonia, and odors from the facility constituted a criminal public nuisance, a common law public nuisance, and a private nuisance at the Plaintiffs’ homes.  Prior to the trial, the court dismissed both of the public nuisance counts on summary judgment.  The matter proceeded to trial on the private nuisance claim.  The parties presented 33 witnesses, including three experts for the Plaintiffs and two experts for the Defendant.  On February 4, 2009, following nine days of testimony, a jury rendered a verdict in favor of the Defendant, finding that the new facility was not a private nuisance.