Dotson v. EDP Renewables North America, Rising Tree Wind Farm et.al.
Manly, Stewart and Finaldi|May 7, 2015
This complaint filed by Mrs. Doreen Dotson and her sons David Dotson and Daniel Dotson argues that EDP Renewables North American and Rising Tree Wind Farm LLC bulldozed the Dotson family home after Mrs. Dotson refused to accept money to move from her property. The General Statement of the Case is provided below. The full complaint can be accessed by clicking the links on this page.
This complaint filed by Mrs. Doreen Dotson and her sons David Dotson and Daniel Dotson argues that EDP Renewables North American and Rising Tree Wind Farm LLC bulldozed the Dotson family home after Mrs. Dotson refused to accept money to move from her property. The General Statement of the Case is provided below. The full complaint can be accessed by clicking the links on this page.
General Statement of the Case
Plaintiffs in this action are the victims of the multinational energy developer who refused to accept "No" for an answer. Plaintiff Darlene Dotson is the owner of a single family home situated in Kern County. Defendants are developers and contractors seeking to develop and operate a wind farm in Kern County for profit. The proposed wind farm development would extend over and across several parcels in the unincorporated area of Mojave, including Mrs. Dotson's land. Beginning in 2009, Defendants began a campaign to acquire the rights to develop on these parcels from Mrs. Dotson and her neighbors.
By January 2015, all of the surrounding parcel owners had either sold or leased their land to Defendants -- all but Mrs. Dotson. Realizing that Mrs. Dotson would not sell her land because of the sentimental and historical value of her home represented, Defendants unlawfully and illegally conspired to intimidate and coerce Mrs. Dotson and her family in order to force a sale.
In furtherance of this conspiracy, Defendants unlawfully entered onto Mrs. Dotson's property and physically demolished Mrs. Dotson's home, and all of its precious and irreplaceable contents. Defendants do not deny their actions; rather, they seek to disguise their unlawful conduct as mere accident and continue to pressure Mrs. Dotson to sell the property now that her home has been destroyed.
