Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-4647 PPL ELECTRIC UTILITIES : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CORPORATION, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff : : CIVIL ACTION – LAW vs. : NO. 09-4647 CIVIL : JASON W. and REBECCA L. : BERGEY, : Defendants : IN RE: INJUNCTION BEFORE HESS, J. OPINION AND ORDER On August 17, 2009, we entered an order denying the issuance of a preliminary injunction in this case but permitted the plaintiff to produce additional testimony. Plaintiff seeks to enter onto the land of the defendants in the exercise of an easement as part of a major rebuilding project of the Cumberland-Wertzville electric transmission line. In our earlier opinion, we cited authority for the proposition that the plaintiff could exercise its easement but was prevented from inflicting unnecessary injury with regard to the Bergeys’ property. PPL proposes to enter the Bergeys’ driveway and cross their land to reach its easement which runs parallel to Interstate 81. PPL’s heavier vehicles would cross the property twice – once going in and once coming out. PPL proposes to repair any and all damage and to restore the property to its previous condition at its expense. This will include the removal of any stones or other materials put down to facilitate the movement of vehicles. Any inconvenience to the Bergeys is estimated to be of two weeks’ duration. Notwithstanding this proposal for a relatively harmless entry onto the Bergey property, we required a second hearing so that PPL could explain why it could not enter onto the Bergey property elsewhere and, specifically, from either the east or west end of its existing right-of-way. NO. 09-4647 CIVIL We are now satisfied that these alternative points of entry are no more convenient or less harmful than the method of entry originally proposed by PPL. Both alternatives require that the utility corporation enter over designated wetlands. In the case of at least one of the streams, we are satisfied that extensive damage will be done to the environment. In any event, PPL does not have specific permits to effect entry at either of these locations. The permitting process would take several months and we are not prepared to rule, as a legal matter, that PPL is required to obtain such permits where their proposed method of access will not cause “unreasonable damage to the servient estate.” SeeRestatement Third of Property: Servitudes, Section 4.10 (2000). We will, therefore, permit PPL to submit to the court a proposed order with leave to counsel for the defendants to comment thereon with the understanding that the final order in this case is not entered with the consent of the defendants. ORDER th AND NOW, this 16 day of September, 2009, following multiple hearings in this case, the court being prepared to find in favor of the plaintiff, counsel for PPL Electric Utilities Corporation is authorized to submit to the court a proposed order enjoining any opposition to and otherwise facilitating their entry over the land of the defendants for the purpose of the completion of the Cumberland-Wertzville 69KV Rebuild. BY THE COURT, _______________________________ Kevin A. Hess, J. James H. Thomas, Esquire For the Plaintiff Douglas G. Miller, Esquire For the Defendants 2 PPL ELECTRIC UTILITIES : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CORPORATION, : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Plaintiff : : CIVIL ACTION – LAW vs. : NO. 09-4647 CIVIL : JASON W. and REBECCA L. : BERGEY, : Defendants : IN RE: INJUNCTION BEFORE HESS, J. ORDER th AND NOW, this 16 day of September, 2009, following multiple hearings in this case, the court being prepared to find in favor of the plaintiff, counsel for PPL Electric Utilities Corporation is authorized to submit to the court a proposed order enjoining any opposition to and otherwise facilitating their entry over the land of the defendants for the purpose of the completion of the Cumberland-Wertzville 69KV Rebuild. BY THE COURT, _______________________________ Kevin A. Hess, J. James H. Thomas, Esquire For the Plaintiff Douglas G. Miller, Esquire For the Defendants :rlm