Articles filed under Legal from Indiana

Rush Co. wind fight hits Court of Appeals

APEX Clean Energy, last week filed its appellant brief with the Indiana Court of Appeals contesting the May decision by Rush Superior Court Judge Matthew D. Bailey, which upheld the Rush County Board of Zoning Appeals decision in 2015 to enact a 2,300-foot wind turbine setback from non-participating property lines.
16 Aug 2016

Wind company responds to suit; Special judge named in case

The group of county landowners, who reside in those townships, are challenging the decommissioning agreement between Whitewater Wind LLC and the county commissioners based on their claims that the agreement did not adhere to the county’s zoning ordinance, specifically regarding financial assurance related to the decommissioning and removal of commercial wind turbines once they’ve reached their lifespan of roughly 30 years.
26 Jun 2016

Appeal of judge decision filed by Flat Rock Wind

Following the ruling by Decatur County Judge Bailey which supported Rush County BZA’s decision on the setbacks of wind turbine distance from non-participating landowners, APEX Clean Energy/Flatrock Wind Project had 30 days to file an appeal of that decision and last week they did just that.
25 Jun 2016

Local judge bows out of wind farm battle

Fayette Circuit Judge Beth A. Butsch, who had been presiding in the court case involving Fayette County Commissioners, Whitewater Wind LLC – aka NextEra Energy Resources – and the group of 34 county landowners challenging the legitimacy of the county’s wind turbine decommissioning agreement with NextEra, recused herself this week from the case.
17 Jun 2016

Area wind project dealt huge blow

“The Board of Zoning Appeals went through that massive hearing, reviewed the evidence and did a superb job of analyzing the information and making their decision,” Snyder said. “So I think from the standpoint of the (decision), Judge Bailey’s standpoint is very detailed and clearly shows the connection between the evidence that was presented and the 2,300-foot setback.” 
3 Jun 2016

County responds in wind farm suit

Among the concerns from some included the ambiguous language in the original decommissioning agreement and the length of time listed for the security bonds required to pay for the decommissioning of the wind turbines – which appeared to much for a much shorter period of time than the estimated lifespan of the wind farm project, which is required by Fayette County zoning code. 
13 May 2016

Wind farm fight hits courts

The fight against the proposed wind farm project has been picked back up again, by a large group of Fayette County citizens, with the filing late this week at the Fayette County Clerk’s Office of a civil plenary complaint against both the Fayette County Commissioners and NextEra Energy Resources, the energy company behind the Whitewater Wind Farm project. 
14 Mar 2016

Fight over proposed wind farm for Fayette, Henry and Rush counties hits courts

The fight against the proposed wind farm project has been picked back up again, by a large group of Fayette County citizens, with the filing late this week at the Fayette County Clerk’s Office of a civil plenary complaint against both the Fayette County Commissioners and NextEra Energy Resources, the energy company behind the Whitewater Wind Farm project.
14 Mar 2016

Wells County wind turbine appeal denied by Indiana Court of Appeals

Special Judge Thomas Hakes of Huntington Circuit Court gave what was in essence a split decision. He said the six couples attempting to have the 6-3 vote of the Area Plan Commission “were not aggrieved” by the APC’s decision to allow Apex Wind Energy to place 68 wind turbines in Harrison, Chester, Nottingham, and Liberty townships. He also said, however, that the reciprocal setbacks provision violated the property rights of three of the six couples that are plaintiffs to the suit.
25 May 2015

Wind farm owner sues Duke Energy Indiana

Many of the details of Duke Energy’s alleged contract breach are redacted in the 23-page complaint. But those that aren’t allege the utility’s actions have resulted in the wind farm “frequently” being forced to curtail operations, causing sharp reductions in the farm’s electrical output and revenue.
27 Dec 2013

Wind farm says Duke violated contract

When bids are too high, MISO’s automated system electronically signals the energy producer—in this case, the Benton County Wind Farm—and tells it to reduce its output. The lawsuit redacts what Duke specifically did, only noting the utility “curtail[ed] electrical production by refusing to offer the Wind Farm’s power to MISO at competitive prices and then refusing to compensate [the wind farm] when the Wind Farm is directed by MISO not to produce power.”
21 Dec 2013

http://www.windaction.org/posts?location=Indiana&p=3&topic=Legal&type=Article
back to top