Providing Timely Notice of Tort Claims
Tort Claim Notice is Critical to Preserve Rights
Co-ops are the Exception: Private Inurement Does NOT Apply – “Application of the Private Inurement Doctrine to Tax-Exempt Cooperatives”
Both the IRS excess benefit statute and the private inurement doctrine DO NOT apply to tax-exempt cooperatives. 26 U.S.C. § 4958(c) defines an excess benefit transaction as “any transaction in which an economic benefit is provided by an applicable tax-exempt organization directly or indirectly to or for the use of any disqualified person.” For the purposes of this statute, an…
Wolfe v. Flathead Elec. Coop., Inc. – Patronage Capital Refunds
A group of four former cooperative members filed a breach of contract claim against Flathead Electric Cooperative. Wolfe v. Flathead Elec. Coop., Inc., 393 Mont. 312, 314 (Mont. 2018).Plaintiffs were members of the coop during various times, the latest of which was in 2007. Plaintiffs alleged that Flathead violated Montana law when it allocated patronage capital to their accounts, but…
State Allowed to Offer Energy Generation Facilities Subsidies – “Electric Power Supply Association, et al., v. Anthony M. Star, Director of Illinois Power Agency, et al., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 25980 (7th Cir. Sept. 13, 2018)”
On September 13, 2018, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an Illinois law, 20 ILSC 3855/1-75(d-5), who provides subsidies to some of the state’s struggling nuclear generation facilities, against a challenge by the Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA), an advocacy group for the electric power industry. Under the Federal Power Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is authorized…
IN Supreme Court Rules: Fantasy Sports Do NOT Need Permission to Use Athletes Real Names – “Daniels v. FanDuel, Inc.”
On Thursday, Oct. 24, the Indiana Supreme Court answered a vital question surrounding online fantasy sports sites: Does a fantasy sports site need permission before it uses a player’s name and statistics in its online fantasy game? The Indiana Supreme Court answered no to this question, falling in line with the national trend of decisions favoring sports betting. Former collegiate…
INDIANA SUPREME COURT MODIFIES DECISION TO ALLOW RECOVERY OF COST OVERRUNS DURING RATEMAKING CASE
On June 20, 2018, the Indiana Supreme Court upheld a narrow interpretation of the Transmission, Distribution and Storage System Improvement Charge (“TDSIC”) statute in NIPSCO Industrial Group v. Northern Indiana Public Service Co., 100 N.E.3d 234 (Ind. 2018). A summary of that case can be found here: https://www.indianabusinesslawyerblog.com/nipsco-industrial-group-v-northern-indiana-public-service-co-100-n-e-3d-234-ind-2018/. On September 25, 2018, the Indiana Supreme Court reissued their opinion in…
The Civil Justice System: Protecting Your Family
BE SPECIFIC: ILLINOIS CASE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE IN PLEADING STANDARDS – “WEBB v. FRAWLEY: 7TH CIRCUIT EMPHASIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF PLEADING STANDARDS IN RECENT ILLINOIS CASE”
The success of litigation depends not only on the facts of a case, but also how a case is pleaded. A seemingly meritorious claim can be dismissed where the claim is not carefully and deliberately plead to the court. This is especially true where a plaintiff’s claim involves an element of intent or fraud. The 7th Circuit reinforced the importance…
ENERGY LAW – SEVENTH CIRCUIT HOLDS THAT PUBLIC UTILITY’S USE OF “SMART METERS” DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN UNREASONABLE SEARCH
On August 16, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued an opinion holding that the use of digital “smart meters” by a public utility constitutes a reasonable search under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as well as the Illinois Constitution. After receiving a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy to modernize its electrical…
FERC Legal — Arkansas Public Service Commission v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission US Court of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit No. 16-1305 (Argued 1/19/18)
On June 1, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit declined to review an order issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) holding that an operating company that withdrew from a “multi-state energy system” had to continue sharing benefits from a settlement with the other system members, even after it withdrew from the system. In 1951,…