Mason County wind farm neighbors sue Consumers Energy: Complaint Filed
Craig W. Horn and David L. Puskar, Attorneys for the Plaintiffs|April 1, 2013
This lawsuit filed against Consumers Energy Company, owner of the Lake Winds Energy Park consisting of fifty-six Vestas V100 1.8 megawatt turbines with a total installed capacity of 100.8 megawatts. An excerpt of the complaint is provided below. The full complaint can be accessed by clicking on the links at the bottom of this page.
This lawsuit filed against Consumers Energy Company, owner of the Lake Winds Energy Park consisting of fifty-six Vestas V100 1.8 megawatt turbines with a total installed capacity of 100.8 megawatts. An excerpt of the complaint is provided below. The full complaint can be accessed by clicking on the links at the bottom of this page.
Throughout the test/trial period and immediately upon the start of the Wind Farm's commercial operation, Plaintiffs noticed the following significant and material intrusions upon their properties and inside their homes (collectively "Intrusions"):
a) Frequent and highly distressing noise created by and emitted from the Turbines of the wind farm;
b) Vibrations and/or a pulse sensation caused by the rotating blades of the Turbines as the blades passed by the pedestal;
c) A flicker/strobe light effect that often covers some and/or all of the Plaintiffs' properties and intrudes into their homes when sunlight passes through the rotating blades of the Turbines;
d) A highly visible glare which emanates from the Turbines of the Wind Farm when sunlight shines on the Turbines; and
e) Numerous flashing red lights which reflect off the rotating blades of the Turbines, overwhelm the night sky and are readily apparent from inside Plaintiffs' homes.
As a result of the Intrusions caused by Defendant's operation of the Wind Farm, Plaintiffs, as the case may be, began experiencing, by way of example not limitation, some and/or all of the following physical conditions, among others:
a) Inability to sleep and repeated awakening during sleep;
b) Headaches and pressure;
c) Ringing and aching in the ears;
d) Dizziness;
e) Stress and tension;
f) Extreme fatigue;
g) Diminished ability to concentrate;
h) Nausea; and
i) Other physiological and cognitive effects.
In sum, the actions of the Defendant have directly and proximately caused Plaintiffs substantial damage, including but not necessarily limited to:
a) Physical harm and adverse health effects;
b) Disruption of Plaintiffs' lives and general emotional distress;
c) Diminution of the value of Plaintiffs' properties;
d) Loss of the ability to partition their properties to sell residential lots;
e) Difficulty carrying on normal recreational activities;
f) Difficulty conducting work related activities on their properties and/or harm to the business enterprises some Plaintiffs conduct on their properties;
g) Loss of use and enjoyment of Plaintiffs' properties;
i) Other damages that naturally and consequently flow from Defendant's actions.