LOCATION/TYPE

NEWS HOME

[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Archive
RSS

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Get weekly updates

WHAT TO DO
when your community is targeted

RSS

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

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

News Watch Home

Appeals court upholds ruling in wind farm suit 

Credit:  By MARY PIEPER | Mason City Globe Gazette | 30 May 2013 | globegazette.com ~~

HAMPTON – The Iowa Court of Appeals Thursday upheld a Franklin County District Court order to dismiss a suit filed against Franklin County Wind LLC by Hawkeye Land Co.

FCW, which was in the process of building a 60-turbine wind farm in Franklin County, buried conduits containing electrical wires and fiber optic cables across railroad right-of-way property in four locations.

In May 2012 Hawkeye, a corporation that owns the right to grant easements over certain railroad rights-of-way in Franklin County, sought to prevent FCW from construction at the crossing sites. The district court granted a temporary injunction.

FCW moved to dissolve the injunction, and the district court agreed to do so, ruling that Hawkeye did not set forth adequate evidence to show that FCW’s actions would result in damage to the railroad, destruction of property or injury to persons.

FCW then filed a motion to dismiss, saying the district court lacked authority to hear the case until Hawkeye exhausted its administrative remedies. Hawkeye resisted the motion, arguing FCW waived any objection by its actions in seeking to dissolve the temporary injunction.

The district court agreed with FCW that it lacked authority to hear the case. Hawkeye appealed the district court’s decision.

The Iowa Court of Appeals said because Hawkeye did not allow the Iowa Utilities Board the first opportunity to resolve its dispute with FCW, the district court was without authority to hear its complaint.

Source:  By MARY PIEPER | Mason City Globe Gazette | 30 May 2013 | globegazette.com

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 Funding
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)

Share:

e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share


News Watch Home

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

 Follow:

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