This 18-page opinion and order issued by a three-judge Commonwealth Court panel upheld county Judge Charles M. Miller's ruling that the zoning permit issued to Broad Mountain Development Co. LLC was correctly revoked by Butler Township. Broad Mountain sought permission to construct 20-28 wind turbines in the township. The panel found the developer did not have the right to the permit because wind turbines were not allowed in a Woodland-Conservation zoning district in the township. In addition, the panel ruled that the citizens who opposed the building of the windmills filed a timely appeal of Broad Mountain's original permit, and the company did not acquire a vested right to the permit, according to the opinion written by Judge P. Kevin Brobson.
Library filed under Legal
The Appeal Court threw out a legal challenge mounted by Rebecca and Brian Barnes against the six-turbine Armistead farm at Old Hutton. The pair claimed it would blight the landscape, cause a noise nuisance and put their three children at risk.
This important paper explains the legal challenges to implementing State-level renewable energy policies that are in compliance with the U.S. Constitution.
A French court has ordered one of the country's leading developers and owner-operators of wind power to remove four turbines from a 17.85MW facility in south-west France, because they cause "exceptional neighbourhood disturbance."
This important case before le tribunal de Montpellier has resulted in a decision ordering La Compagnie du Vent to dismantle 4 of the 21-turbines sited near Névian, France. The judge also awarded damages of €500,000 to the family which brought the case to compensate for the nuisance caused and the estimated loss in value of their property, which is situated 650 meters from the nearest turbine. A rough translation of the ruling is provided below. The full ruling, in French, can be accessed by clicking the link(s) on this page.
This useful paper examines the status of nuisance cases filed against wind energy projects through to the year 2009. Many more thousands of wind turbines have been sited since this paper was published and hundreds of lawsuits filed. This paper provides a helpful understanding of US nuisance law.
Opponents of a controversial Devon wind farm are devastated after the Government ruled that it should go ahead. The Fullabrook Wind Farm will see 22 110-metre high turbines built on a hillside close to an area of outstanding natural beauty.
Background: One month after the plaintiffs purchased defendants' 133-acre Otsego County property, they learned that plans were in the works for the construction of large wind turbines on the adjacent parcel. They thereafter commenced this action seeking rescission of the contract and money damages stemming from alleged fraud and misrepresentation on the part of defendants in conjunction with the sale. At issue was an order of the Supreme Court denying summary judgment to the defendants. Summary judgment is when the court rules against a party without a trial) to defendants. The court upheld the denial of summary judgment. The ruling can be accessed by clicking the links on this page.
This case, before the New Jersey Superior Court, represents one of the first instances of a nuisance case brought against an operating wind turbine due to noise. The court found that the defendants' wind turbine constituted an "actionable nuisance".