Laserfiche WebLink
reasonable attorney's fees under S1988. Furthermore, there is <br />overwhelming case law in support of the directly contrary <br />proposition. Mr. Welsh is entitled to his attorney's fees <br />whether or not his action has advanced a broader public interest. <br />2. THIS COURT ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT RESPONDENT'S ACTION <br />DOES NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ADVANCE A BROADER PUBLIC INTEREST. <br />The riyht to own private property free from undue <br />government interference is a fundamental right protected by the <br />state and federal constitutions, and the United States Supreme <br />Court has specifically held that 12 U.S.C. S1983 applies to <br />deprivation of property rights. Lynch v. Household Finance <br />Corp., 405 U.S. 538, 553, reh'g denied, 406 U.S. 911 (1972). <br />This Court erred in associating the case at bar with certain "dog <br />bite cases" and common law negligence actions in which courts <br />have denied attorney's fees. <br />Mr. Welsh sought and obtained declaratory and injunctive <br />relief to prevent Appellant City of Orono from interfering with <br />his DNR-appro% _ _redging plans. As a result of his action, this <br />Court has firmly established the broad proposition "that the DNR <br />has exclusive jurisdiction and authority to regulate dredging in <br />beds of public waters in Minnesota and that local ordinances <br />. . . which pu:port to regulate such activity are null and void." <br />Welsh Opinion at 9. In achieving that result, Mr. Welsh has <br />benefitted similarly situated landowners throughout the State of <br />Minnesota by clarifying the regulatory relationship among units <br />of government with respect to public waters, and ensuring that <br />complex environmental issues will be addressed in a consistent <br />-10- <br />