Just Say No to Big Brother’s Smart Meters by Orlean Koehle Chapter Seven Law Suits Concerning Smart Meters:
The First Successful Law Suit - Portland, Maine, reported May 25, 2011, “Skelton, Taintor & Abbott Wins Landmark Smart Meter Case” On behalf of several Maine residents, the law firm Skelton, Taintor & Abbott secured a landmark decision that will benefit utility customers throughout the country. Alan Stone, chair of the firm's energy law group, successfully convinced the Maine Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) to find that it was an unjust and unreasonable practice for Central Maine Power Company (CMP) to refuse to permit residential and small commercial customers to opt-out of CMP’s smart meter program and to retain their existing electromagnetic meters.. Stone proved that because of unresolved concerns relating to health, privacy and cyber security resulting from the installation of wireless meters on their homes, customers should have a choice concerning the installation of those meters. CMP argued vigorously that customers should not be allowed to opt out, and the MPUC found that position to be unjust and unreasonable. The Portland Press Herald has described the decision as a “landmark” case that represents the
first time any state had ordered an electric utility to permit customers the choice to opt out of a smart meter program. The case has been followed by other Public Utilities Commissions and utility experts around the country, and will serve as precedent for others in the determination of how to resolve what has become a growing debate about customer choice and smart meters. Alan Stone is also chair of the trial practice group at Skelton, Taintor and Abbott, and has been recognized by Best Lawyers in the area of Energy Law. (
http://www.skeltontaintorabbott.net/news/85/77/Skelton-Taintor-Abbott-Wins-Landmark-Smart-Meter- Case.html)
Possible Law Suits in California: When it became obvious that PG&E did not respect local government, nor the property and privacy rights of their customers, many irate customers were looking for what they could do legally to get the meters removed. A kind attorney (who wishes to remain anonymous) prepared the following information free of charge on how to file a small claims law suit:
STOP SMART METERS with a Small Claims Suit
If a utility company installed a Smart Meter on your property or residence, you can do something about it.
Who Can Take Action? 1. Owners of the property 2. People who reside in the property
A Small Claim Makes A Big Difference Did you ever wonder why the bigger something gets the harder it is to deal with? Well, even if you never thought about it before, it’s really true. That’s why Small Claims Court lawsuits brought by tens of thousands of California utility users may help to stop Smart Meters in California. Oh, sure, the utility companies have the money to fight thousands of Small Claims Court cases, but the logistics of doing it would be a nightmare for them. They will have to respond to each and every Small Claims Court case, and when a case comes to trial in Small Claims Court they will have to send an agent or employee to court to oppose the case. Just to organize all those responses and people will be a huge logistical burden, even for a big utility company. What’s more, it would give the utility company a public black eye, and they are wary of that kind of publicity.
96
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165