Last Round of Court Documents Filed in Lake View Natural Dairy v. Minnesota Department of Agriculture

The last scheduled round of court documents has been filed in the Lake View Natural Dairy (LVND) v. Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) court case, in which the MDA is attempting to force statutory rule (that does not apply) upon LVND who have a plethora of constitutional (and other) arguments against the MDA’s actions.  LVND’s attorney, Zenas Baer, has filed this response; BERGLUND’S REPLY  MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT  OF AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING ON CONSTITUTIONAL  ISSUES, to the  MDA’s arguments.

There have been three documents scheduled by the court; first was LVND’s original memorandum, second was the MDA’s response memorandum and the last was LVND’s reply memorandum that is listed above. These three documents are a lot to sift through, but are the arguments concerning all off our personally held rights to either associate privately with one another (LVND’s arguments) or the right of the government to control those private associations through statutory police powers (MDA’s arguments).  I’ll point out again, I am not anti-government and was a law enforcement officer myself for 15 years (13-Minneapolis PD and 2 – Cook County Sheriff’s Office).  But, it is clear to me that the MDA is attempting to “widen their net” of statutory police powers that infringes upon private men and women’s liberties, specifically our rights to associate.  The statutes they attempt to impose upon LVND were not meant to be applied to a privately owned small farm that sells their products directly to informed private men and women.  The arguments for and against these personal liberties is contained in the documents linked above.

In this third document filed by LVND, Zenas Baer argues:

  • Why the MDA has failed to address how they are impairing LVND’s (and men and women who privately associate with them) fundamental liberties through inspection, regulation and control.
  • Why the MDA’s broad inspection authority does not include authority to inspect a “Dairy Farm.”
  • Why Federal regulations do not apply to the LVND.
  • Why the MDA’s argument that LVND has waived its right to challenge the constitutional basis of the MDA’s regulatory scheme is without merit.

The next court date is Tuesday, October 13th at 10:00am at the Cook County Courthouse.  We hope for a large show of support at that hearing, but currently have no estimate of the amount of people who will show up to support our liberties, so we ask that anyone who is able to come and that we not rely on others to support these individual protections.

2nd Round of Court Documents Filed in Lake View Natural Dairy v. Minnesota Department of Agriculture

The Assistant State Attorney, Max Kieley, has filed the Minnesota Department Of Agriculture’s (MDA’s) Memorandum Of Support Of The Validity And Enforcement Of The Administrative Inspection Order (AIO), which is the second scheduled document required by the Court in the Lake View Natural Dairy v. MDA court case.  The MDA’s 27 page memorandum (with another 112 pages of exhibits, much of which has previously been linked to within this blog) is a response to the arguments put forth by LVND’s attorney, Zenas Baer, which was the first scheduled document.

Kieley relies on several state statutes that give the MDA their inspection and regulation authority.  However, those statutes themselves give exemptions to farms, some in part and some entirely.  For example Chapter 28a, known as “Minnesota Consolidated Food Licensing Law,” states:

28A.15 EXCLUSIONS. Subdivision 1. Licensing provisions applicability. The licensing provisions of sections 28A.01 to 28A.16 shall not apply to the following: Subd. 2. Sales by farmers; others not in food business. Persons selling the products of the farm or garden occupied and cultivated by them, or to persons not regularly engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling food and who prepare food only on order of and for sale directly to the ultimate consumer, or to educational, charitable or religious organizations not regularly engaged in the business of manufacturing, processing, or selling food at their established educational, charitable or religious institutions.

Another, Chapter 32 “Dairy Products,”  jurisdiction to inspect/regulate/license only applies if LVND can be defined as a “Dairy Plant.”  That definition, which Kieley argues applies to LVND, excludes a dairy farm:

Chapter 32.01, Subd. 6. Dairy plant. “Dairy plant” means any place where a dairy product is manufactured, processed, or handled and includes milk-receiving stations, creameries, cheese factories, condenseries, milk plants, transfer stations, cream stations, marketing organizations not operating dairy plants, but purchasing milk and cream directly from producers for resale, and other establishments, as those terms are used in this chapter and chapters 17, 27, 31, and 33; but does not include a dairy farm or an establishment where no dairy products are processed, but dairy products are sold at wholesale or retail only.

Kieley continues, with the MDA’s Memorandum, to explain why private farmers/gardeners have no state or federal constitutional protections to be free from state intrusion while privately associating with private men and women to exchange money for food.  The MDA is attempting to treat private farmers, private gardeners, private men and private women, associating in a direct private relation, to choose what they put on their dinner table; the same as they would a large industry dairy farm who sells to a creamery, who then bottles their milk and then sells it to many different retail stores for retail purchase.  These are two very different relations.  The first carrying protections of Intimate Association (Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 1984) and the second being rightly under jurisdiction of the MDA as a non-private retail sale with many different handlers of the product before reaching the end user.

I have linked to the court documents in this case so people interested may read and judge the validity of the arguments coming from both sides.  I hope that readers will consider attending the next court hearing, “Court Date: Tuesday, October 13th, 2015 at 10:00 AM for Lake View Natural Dairy v. MDA.”

There is one scheduled document to be filed yet by LVND’s attorney, Zenas Baer, which will be posted soon after it’s Tuesday, September 9th filing date.  This document will respond to the MDA’s arguments.  Stay tuned, it is an incredible amount of information to sift through, but our personal liberty is more than worth this effort.  Thank you.

Court Date: Tuesday, October 13th, 2015 at 10:00 AM for Lake View Natural Dairy v. MDA

The ongoing court battle, in which the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) is attempting to force inspection and regulation upon privately owned Lake View Natural Dairy (LVND), is scheduled to continue on Tuesday, October 13th, 2015 at 10:00 am at the Cook County Courthouse.  Your presence is requested at this hearing to show your support!  This regulation would dictate that LVND buy cost prohibitive machinery for pasteurizing and bottling which would result in their doors closing permanently, see previous post – What would licensure, inspection and regulation mean to Lake View Natural Dairy?

LVND has consistently asserted, due to constitutional (state and federal) limitations upon government powers, that the state has no jurisdiction to inspect and regulate LVND because they are privately owned (they are not incorporated or listed as a business with the state) and they only associate with private men and women who are intentionally seeking out LVND’s raw milk and other farm/garden products.  They do not associate with commercial dairy operations (ie. sell their milk to a creamery for further processing).  LVND offers unpasteurized/raw milk, is not a Grade A or Grade B dairy and only sells their farm/garden products at their farm/garden location in Grand Marais, MN.

Currently, the MDA has removed their previous Assistant Attorney General, Kimberly Middendorf, from the case.  A new Assistant Attorney General, Max Kieley, has been assigned.  Unfortunately, Kieley immediately attempted to block any kind of constitutional arguments concerning whether an Administrative Order of Inspection (AIO) by the MDA upon LVND is valid.  Kiely asked the court to strike 17 of 22 pages of constitutionally based arguments against the validity of the AIO,  contained in LVND’s attorney’s most recent 28 page memorandum to the court, that is impairing the constitutional rights and privileges of the owner (David Berglund) of LVND.  The Court informed Kieley that if there are issues that legitimately go to the constitutionality of the Department’s regulation of Berglund selling his products, the Court would hear those arguments.  This was the same tactic that the previous Assistant Attorney General attempted days prior to the first court hearing held on March 9th, 2015 and at that time this same tactic was flatly rejected by the Court.

LVND and every private farmer/gardener in MN will need the support of other private men and women again on Tuesday, October 13th, 2015 at the Cook County Courthouse at 10:00am.  A hearing is scheduled at that time, after all current arguments have been given to the court in writing, during which all parties have been ordered to be present in person.  The attorneys will be presenting their arguments verbally, which will be based on the previous filed affidavits.

Please support your individual right to make choices for you and your family by planning on attending the October 13th hearing with other supporters of LVND, supporters of small private farmers and supporters of small private gardeners.  These decisions will impact anyone who has a small garden and a single cow or goat that would like to sell their extra potatoes or half gallon of milk to their neighbor.   LVND has been providing its current farm/garden products to the people of Cook County, MN for over 12 years, a tradition spanning over the last 100 years.  Check this website ( often as I will add information regularly, as I understand it, about this matter and the arguments against the MDA’s intentions.  The MDA has filed their memorandum responding to LVND’s attorney’s memorandum, and that MDA response will be posted soon for people to read and make their own judgements upon.

Most of all, please DON’T assume that someone else will be at the hearing and it’s not important for you personally to attend.  At this time, I have no estimate of the number of people planning on attending the court date.  Above all else, this is about our individual rights, which must be protected by each individual themselves!  Recruit others to arrive with you and stay throughout the hearing if possible.  Spread this website and links to others, so they might choose to come on October 13th!

Please click “HERE” and simply type “I’ll be there!” along with the number attending in the subject line, so that we can get an accurate estimate of how many will be attending. 

Court hearing scheduled for October 13th at 10:00 am.
Cook County Courthouse
411 West 2nd Street
Grand Marais, MN 55604

Please arrive early for security screening and seating as there may only be standing room available.  Please leave metal items (i.e. pocket knives, etc.) in your vehicles to help our deputies with the potential large volume of persons attending the hearing.  If you forget you have restricted items on your person, you will be asked to return them to your vehicle. 

The Cook County Sheriff’s Office did NOT force an inspection upon the Lake View Natural Dairy on behalf of the MN Dept. of Agriculture as requested.   This occurred because the Sheriff’s Office was informed about the issue at hand.  Thank them when you see them, this may have been the first time this has occurred throughout the country!

– See more at: , including all the past postings.

1st Round of Court Documents Filed in Lake View Natural Dairy v. Minnesota Department of Agriculture

Lake View Natural Dairy’s (LVND) attorney, Zenas Baer, has filed “Berglund’s Memorandum in Support of Evidentiary Hearing on Constitutional Challenges Raised by Berglund to Prevent MDA Inspections,” which supports all or our rights to associate with one another without intrusion by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA).  This is the first scheduled court document required by Judge Cuzzo to clarify both sides of the constitutional argument that will be decided.  Please read the document and judge for yourself the validity of the arguments.  There are many legal reasons contained in the memorandum, some that we have spoken about previously on this blog:  The Minnesota Constitution and How it Protects the Dairy to Consumer Association;  The US Constitution’s 1st Amendment and How it Protects the Dairy to Consumer Association.

Baer sets these arguments clearly and convincingly.  The memorandum includes:  Background, Berglund’s customers constitutional rights affected, Factual issues the must be developed, Summary of arguments and Legal analysis of the many specific legal arguments put forth. In my opinion, the document is captivating in its content, however unfortunate it is that the MDA caused it’s creation and cannot recognize these basic fundamental rights.

With all the support LVND has received locally and from around the nation, we will continue this cause of protecting, not just LVND’s, but all of our fundamental liberties.  Thanks again to all of you, Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund, Organic Consumer’s Association, Michael and Diana Hartmann and most of all to those who keep LVND running-David Berglund, Heidi Berglund and Lyndsay (Berglund) Anderson!

To read the article that started this blog, click here: “Policing Milk: A Cop’s View on the Lake View Dairy Case”


Upcoming Court Schedule for MDA v. Lake View Natural Dairy

Recently the Cook County Court, the attorney for Lake View Natural Dairy (LVND) and the attorney for the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) met and created a time table for arguments to be submitted in this case.  LVND’s attorney, Zenas Baer, has submitted his written argument (I will post this when I obtain a copy) in support of LVND’s right to a hearing on the constitutional issues (whether LVND and the informed men and woman who associate with them have a constitutional right to be free of state intrusion).

The MDA has a month to respond and then LVND’s attorney has two weeks to respond.  Another phone meeting is scheduled for September 29th between the court and the attorneys.  At that time, it will be determined if an evidentiary hearing is required.

I will continue to post these documents so that we can all judge for ourselves the merits of the arguments.   Again, thank you for your support (Lake View Natural Dairy Fund).

Support Your Right To Choose, Ride The Hay Wagon At FishPic Parade

Hey All,

Lake View Natural Dairy (LVND) is putting a parade float together for the 86th Annual Fisherman’s Picnic Parade in Grand Marais (arrive at the elementary school parking lot on Sunday, August 2nd at noon, parade at 1pm). Go to the schedule of events for the Fisherman’s Picnic here. The main float will be exhibition in nature featuring; you guessed it, the farm!  We are exploring having a second float that would consist of supporters of farm/garden direct to consumer and supporters of LVND who would be riding a hay wagon.  The “Support Float” would follow the LVND float and would likely have a banner with a message supporting “Constitutional Liberties” in sourcing your own food, etc.  Supporters are encouraged to make there own appropriate signs.  Kids viewing the parade would also encourage supporters to bring bags of candy to throw at them.

We would need 20 supporters to confirm that they would be excited to meet at the staging area at noon.  Please send me an email here to RSVP that you would like to participate.  If the support float becomes full we would encourage supporters to walk between the floats with us (priority to ride would be given to those unable to walk the parade route).  Alternately, if we don’t have 20 people RSVP to ride the support float, we would encourage those who would like to show their support to walk behind the LVND float and make their own appropriate signs.

For those who do RSVP, I will respond to you all in a group email on Wednesday, July 29th, to let you know the status of our numbers and whether the support float is happening.

Thanks so much for all your support!  See you at FishPic.



Judge Michael Cuzzo, Cook County District Court, issued a ruling (Lake View Dairy Order June 3, 2015) concerning the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) attempting to hold Lake View Natural Dairy​ (LVND) owner David Berglund in contempt of court for refusing a Court issued Inspection Order that would lead to costly regulations imposed by the MDA.  Those regulations would likely put LVND out of business.  The Court has DENIED the MDA’s request to hold Berglund in contempt!

LVND’s attorney (Zenas Baer) has argued that the MDA does not have the authority to force inspection or regulation on LVND because they are a private farm that only sells directly to informed private men and women (The MDA’s Petition and the Dairy Farms Answer).  State statute specifically states that it only applies to Grade A and Grade B dairies, which does not apply to a “regular old dairy farm” that is privately owned and does not enter into any commercial relations to sell it’s dairy or other products to other commercial entities.  LVND has never incorporated or applied for a business listing with the state.  They are no different from local private farmers/gardeners that grow extra potatoes or collect extra eggs that they wish to sell directly to their neighbors.   Yet the MDA continues to attempt to impose improper statute on LVND, creating a Due Process nightmare for the MDA.  The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution contain a ‘due process clause‘. Due process deals with the administration of justice and thus the due process clause acts as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the Government outside the sanction of law.

The court has again placed the inspection order on hold, until the arguments are heard and there is a final ruling.  On June 23rd, the court will be scheduling a time table for attorneys to enter constitutional arguments in writing and then an evidentiary hearing to be held presumably at the Cook County Court House.  I have no way of knowing when that hearing will take place (maybe end of July or in August?), but I will be posting that information when it is available.  We will again need public support to be present upon that TBA date.  This is our opportunity, yet again, to voice our support with our presence.

The likelihood of this court case making it’s way through multiple levels of the court and ultimately landing within the jurisdiction of the MN Supreme Court are quite high.  This is a costly proposition and this costly weight has been born by Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund who should be thanked for funding this fight.  Please consider also donating to the Lake View Natural Dairy – Fund  (hosted by Organic Consumers Association out of Finland, MN) to help them continue this fight.  We need to prepare as much as possible economically for this fight, which has cost others dearly.  We hope this will not be the case, but we must prepare for the worst.

This will likely be an important case to clarify the constitutional rights of association, right of privacy, and due process for private farmers/gardeners and private men and women who wish to directly associate concerning products of the farm.  Imagine restoring these fundamental rights to informed private men and women who wish to have more control over where they get the food they provide their families.  More regulation by our government is not always the best thing for men and women, especially when that regulation is making small farmers/gardeners close their doors because of economic hardship, which in turn limits food choices for all.  There is a place for the MDA to interject itself in the food supply chain, however the use of their powers should not be between the private farm and private man or woman.

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power. -Abraham Lincoln-

Stay tuned.


Motion to Add to Court Record – Sheriff’s Statement Denied-UPDATED



Their has been little happening since the March 9th court hearing concerning Lake View Natural Dairy (LVND) vs. Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA).  The court case is about the MDA attempting to force inspection and regulation upon LVND (a private farm that sells it’s products directly to informed private men and women, no commercial business is conducted) that would likely result in LVND shutting it’s doors due to financial collapse.  We have been waiting with anticipation for a decision by Judge Cuzzo concerning the constitutional issues raised by LVND’s attorney (Zenas Baer). In the interim Baer did file a significant Motion to Supplement the Record (4-29-15 Supp Motion) on April 29th, 2015.  Specifically to add to the court record a signed statement by retired Sheriff Mark Falk that states:

“I, Sheriff Mark Falk, previously the elected Sheriff of Cook County, MN (February 1, 2005 to June 30th, 2014-retired), swear that in or about the month of May, 2014, I received a phone call from a female named Kim or Kimberley that was an attorney for the Minnesota Attorney’s office. She was involved with prosecution/enforcement activities concerning Lake View Natural Dairy owned and operated by David Berglund.  Kim spoke to me about assisting the State Attorney’s Office with the enforcement of an inspection via the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) upon Lake View Natural Dairy, whom had been refusing inspection by the MDA. I informed Kim that I was aware of the previous inspection attempts.  I told Kim that I would not allow the State’s Attorney’s Office or the MDA to use the Cook County Sheriff’s Office in any manner to assist in the enforcement of inspections upon Lake View Natural Dairy, due to my concerns over whether the MDA had jurisdiction to enforce the inspection upon Lake View Natural Dairy due to the Minnesota Constitutional Article 13, Section 7 protections.”  MarkFalkStatement

The action, or refused action, by a sitting Sheriff when the MDA was attempting to force their will upon LVND is significant, because the Sheriff is the highest elected local official that has the power to use force upon men and women.  They also have the responsibility to protect men and women not only from individual criminals, but from other branches of local, state and federal government that may by acting beyond it’s limits of authority upon a man or woman or even upon the Sheriff Office itself (see Mack/Printz v. US).  This is exactly what retired Sheriff Falk did (protecting LVND’s rights against a government agency attempting to surpass their limits of authority) when he refused assistance to the MDA in forcing inspection upon LVND.

Also, Baer sought to add the fact that the Cook County Board of Commissioners passed a letter of support for LVND, private farmers/gardeners and private consumers concerning Minnesota Constitutional Article 13, Section 7:  “No license required to peddle. Any person may sell or peddle the products of the farm or garden occupied and cultivated by him without obtaining a license therefor.” 

The Letter of Support passed by the Cook County Commissioners stated the following.

“The Cook County Board of Commissioners will support Lake View Natural Dairy and their protection under Minnesota Constitutional Article 13, Section 7:

‘No license required to peddle. Any person may sell or peddle the products of the farm or garden occupied and cultivated by him without obtaining a license therefor.’ 

We believe Article 13, Section 7 protects Lake View Natural Dairy from governmental intrusions licensing, when Lake View Natural Dairy is privately associating with private men and women to sell and peddle the products of their farm at their farm location. 

Furthermore, we support the consumer’s right under Article 13, Section 7 to privately associate with other private farmers or gardener’s in a private relationship to purchase these products of the farm or garden.

We support Lake View Natural Dairy’s right to sell products of the farm under Article 13, Section 7 protections, while following common sense safety measures applicable to a privately run dairy farm.

Notice that the letter does NOT only identify LVND, but identifies ALL private farmers, gardeners and private men and women who purchase their products. While not necessarily admissible to influence Judge Cuzzo’s decision in this case (see 5-14-15 Judge Cuzzo Response), the fact that the Cook County Commissioners passed this Letter of Support is the proper role of elected officials speaking for what they believe their constituents want and believe, which is a pure example of how a representative republic should operate.

The MDA (represented by State Assistant Attorney Kimberly Middendorf) responded to the Motion from Baer through a letter (5-7-15 Middendorf Reply), which minimized and misrepresented what the court had done, saying “Respondents were granted a continuance of MDA’s motion hearing for the express purpose of providing them additional time to prepare for it.”  Maybe I’m misinterpreting, but this statement from the State Attorney makes it sound like Baer just needed more time to prepare a defense, which is FAR from the truth. (UPDATE 6-7-15:  To be intellectually honest, I did misinterpret the above quote from the Attorney General.  The quote was referencing the fact that the original court date had been set for February 9th, 2015.  LVND then retained an attorney and the court date was rescheduled for March 9th, 2015 to allow time for the LVND attorney to prepare, just as stated in the quote.  The misinterpretations on my part I have struck through.)

I feel like I was at a different court hearing(The following statements still hold true).The court hearing that I observed had many state and federal constitutional issues raised by Baer (Affidavit of Zenas Baer in Support of Berglunds Challenge to Jurisdiction of Minnesota Department of Agriculture Right of Inspection of a Family Farm & Reply to MDAs Application for an Order for Inspection of David Berglund and Lake View Natural Dairy) that were significant enough for the court to stay their own order for inspection.  It is clear that the courts actions were to allow the court time to further determine how these issues, raised by Baer, may or may not effect the outcome of the courts decision/ruling as to whether Berglund is in contempt of the original Order for Inspection and whether the MDA is acting within their limits of authority (they do have limits). Or if the MDA is over-reaching and infringing on the protected actions of LVND and it’s owners.  I’m sure it is normal for attorneys to minimize the oppositions arguments, but it does seem intellectually dishonest.

The State Attorney ends the letter (5-7-15 Middendorf Reply) with, “It is long past time for Lake View Dairy to be inspected, like all other food processors and retail food stores in Minnesota.”  With all due respect, I don’t think the State Attorney understands that MN Constitutional Articles (like Article 13, Section 7) are superior to ALL other MN statute and that the MDA’s interpretation of a “food processor” or “retail food store” just doesn’t apply to a privately run dairy farm (or private gardener).  As the MN Supreme Court sited in State of Mn v. Hartmann (2005):

“This view is supported by this court’s observation in a 1925 case that article XIII, section 7, gives “recognition [] to the fact that tillers of the soil stand in a peculiar position in reference to the marketing of their products, and it prohibits the imposition of a license to sell or peddle the same.”  Minnesota Wheat Growers’ Co-op Marketing Ass’n v. Huggins, 162 Minn. 471, 480, 203 N.W. 420, 424 (1925).”

The above passage firmly distinguishes and separates private farmers/gardeners from “all other food processors and retail food stores in Minnesota,” the later being subject to licensing, but NOT the former “tillers of the soil”.  In addition to not being subject to licensure, during 1906, when Article 13, Section 7 was passed, regulation and inspection were non-existent, yet the MDA believes that article was written to purposely exclude inspection and regulation.  It would be amazing for a legislative body to write a law to exclude constructs that don’t yet exist.  In reality, the legislative body in 1906 removed the state’s ability to license private farmers/gardeners which completely removed the state from what they were doing to intrude on the private farmer/gardener’s ability to produce it’s products and privately associate directly to private men and women in the trade of those products.  The fact that Article 13, Section 7 was passed in 1906 does not minimize the importance or magnitude of the article, no less than time would adversely effect the over 200 year old protection of men and women’s freedom of speech, religion or assembly as granted by the U.S. Constitution.

Judge Cuzzo issued a response (5-14-15 Judge Cuzzo Response) to Baers Motion to Supplement the Record (4-29-15 Supp Motion) and the State Attorney’s letter (5-7-15 Middendorf Reply).  Judge Cuzzo denied the motion to supplement the record of the hearing for various legal reasons (largely do to the evidentiary period being closed for the current decision being issued), and I respect this denial.  Even though this was disappointing, there was something positive in the judge’s ruling on this motion.  Judge Cuzzo stated in his memorandum responding to the Motion to Supplement the Record:

“As argued by Mr. Berglund / Lake View Dairy at the hearing, the issues of the underlying order and the constitutional challenges raised are issues to be determined by the Court.”

Based on this quote, it appears that the Court will be issuing a decision that addresses the constitutional arguments (or at least some of them) that were raised by Baer during the March 9th, 2015 court hearing.  The Court is not obligated to address these constitutional issues, and if it did not, that would be very negative for the LVND arguments proceeding forward.

As you can see, there are many complex issues that are in need of attention concerning this issue.  The decision will not just be effecting LVND, but any one of us in Cook County or greater MN that would like to sell our neighbor some extra eggs or grow extra potatoes and sell them to a friend or acquaintance up to and including private farms selling their products. This case is being followed nationally (see previous posts about national articles) and could be a model for other states to follow.  This is why we will need the support of everyone willing in our community and across the state.

Judge Cuzzo’s written decision is scheduled to be released by June 9th, 2015.  I will be posting the decision as soon as possible.


Lake View Natural Dairy vs. Minnesota Department of Ag – National Articles

It has been over a month since there has been a post concerning the Lake View Natural Dairy (LVND) court case.  I thought I would link some articles that have been on the national scene to get us all back into the mind set of standing up for the dairy, every MN private farmer/gardener and private consumers who would like to privately associate about our food, dairy and more importantly our personal liberties.  Remember, these liberties are guaranteed under our state and federal constitutions.

Judge Cuzzo’s written decision, in LVND vs. Minnesota Department of Ag (MDA), is scheduled to be made public in the next nine days (June 9th).  There has been one court motion to add retired Sheriff Mark Falk’s statement about refusal to assist the MDA (while he was in office) with inspection and to add the information that the Cook County Commissioners passed a Letter of Support for LVND, every private farmer/gardener and private consumers within Cook County.  I will post an article about that motion and Judge Cuzzo’s response in the next couple days.

Below are three articles concerning LVND vs. MDA and one about Raw Milk:

-“Farm Freedom on the Docket in Minnesota” by Pete Kennedy, Esq.  (this article was written before the court date, but does a great job at explaining what is at stake with the LVND vs. MDA court case).  Pete Kennedy is the president of Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund who has been providing funding for the defense of LVND.

-“Sure Getting Uncomfortable in MN Countryside for Ag Regulators” by David Gumpert.

-“UPDATE: Minnesota Farmer Victorious in Court!” By Liz Reitzig.

-“Raw Milk and the Raw Deal” by Dr. Mercola  (very informative about the situation surrounding Raw Milk in the U.S.).