[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Vermont Supreme Court denies Nelsons’ appeal 

Credit:  Robin Smith, Staff Writer, The Orleans Record, orleanscountyrecord.com 17 November 2011 ~~

The Vermont Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to overturn a preliminary injunction giving Green Mountain Power the right to police a blast safety zone for the wind project in Lowell.

The high court denied an appeal for extraordinary relief from wind project neighbors Don and Shirley Nelson of Lowell, telling them to pursue appeals in Orleans Superior Court first.

The Orleans Superior Court preliminary injunction by Judge Martin Maley allows GMP to extend the safety zone onto the Nelsons’ land on the Lowell ridgeline. On Nov. 1, Maley gave GMP the right to use law enforcement to move anyone, including the Nelsons and protesters, out of the safety zone when blasting is under way on the wind project.

Since Nov. 5, officers with the state police and area sheriff’s departments have enforced the preliminary injunction. On Wednesday, two Sterling College students were cited for contempt of court for violating the court order, according to the Orleans County Sheriff’s Department.

The Nelsons asked the Supreme Court to dissolve Maley’s preliminary injunction, saying it violates their constitutionally protected right to the exclusive use of their land. The injunction requires the Nelsons and anyone on their property to move away during a two-hour window around each scheduled blasting of the ridgeline.

The Nelsons’ attorneys said in their appeal that GMP used the injunction to “remove any impediment to GMP’s continuing its blasting activities on lands it is leasing by prohibiting the Nelsons from using a portion of the Nelsons’ adjoining land.”

Don Nelson testified in court before Maley that he and the protesters hoped to hinder blasting enough to slow or stop the construction of the 21 proposed large turbines on the Lowell ridgeline.

The Nelsons asked for a quick response from Vermont Supreme Court, saying they can’t wait for the Orleans Superior Court judge to have another hearing.

It would be too late, their attorneys said, because by the time the Orleans Superior Court hears all the case, the blasting on the ridgeline near the Nelson property would be done.

GMP is clearing a crane path and pad locations to erect 21 industrial-grade wind turbines. Delay could cost millions in extra construction costs and loss of federal tax credits if the project is not completed by the end of 2012, GMP officials have said.

Vermont Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul L Reiber and Associate Justices John Dooley, Marilyn Skoglund and Brian Burgess summarized the Nelsons’ argument in a brief order.

“Petitioners argue that the injunction amounts to an abuse of the superior court’s power and therefore they are entitled to extraordinary relief,” the justices wrote.

“To be entitled to relief …, a party must show that there is no adequate remedy by appeal or by proceedings for extraordinary relief in the superior court,” they wrote, citing court precedents.

“Petitioners have pending motions to reconsider and for … appeal in the trial court. Given that petitioners can pursue these other avenues of relief, the petition for extraordinary relief is denied,” the justices wrote.

The denial does not preclude the Nelsons from appealing again once the lower court completely hears the case.

Other appeals about permits for the wind project have been made to Vermont Supreme Court.

Source:  Robin Smith, Staff Writer, The Orleans Record, orleanscountyrecord.com 17 November 2011

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)


e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share

News Watch Home

Get the Facts
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky