StopUMTS Logo
how to get rid of moles 
08/03/18Boeken over EMV / stralin
23/02/18Meetspecialisten, afsc
20/03/18Stralingsklachten zijn Bi
18/03/18Is Radiation From Your Ce
15/03/18Nieuwsbrief Verminder Ele
13/03/185G And The IOT: Scientifi
13/03/18Thinking of 5G? Here are
08/03/18Can your cell phone damag
Berichten Nederland
20/03/18Stralingsbewuste partijen
19/03/18Gezondheidsraad: Meer ond
17/03/18Een op de vijf kampt met
15/03/18Digitropolis: Documentair
15/03/185G: Staatssecretaris: pro
Berichten België
13/03/18''Verplichte slimme meter
14/02/18Stralingsoverlast door ze
Berichten Internationaal
21/03/18Engeland: Een dalende lev
20/03/18Europa: Brussel zet geldp
16/03/18USA: Senator Michigan get
13/03/18USA: Residents worried ab
Ervaringen | Appellen/oproepen
06/03/18Ervaring uit Duitsland: U
09/02/18Burostoel met smart activ
15/01/18Ziekmakende ervaringen me
17/03/18NTP Reports: Comments by
13/03/18Comparison of radiofreque
13/03/18Favourable and Unfavourab
Veel gestelde vragen
13/05/17Vakantie? Witte zo
10/07/16Zeven veel gestelde vrage
Juridische informatie
02/03/18Formal Complaint to the E
26/02/185G From Space & Santa Fe
23/01/18Reeks publicaties op juri
19/04/18Lezing: Smartphones, WiFi
07/04/18EHS Uitnodiging landelijk
21/03/18Gratis informatiebijeenko
10/09/17Brochures, folders, websi
29/04/16USA: Meer dan 50 tips voo
Briefwisselingen | Archief: 2008, 2005
18/03/18Contact opnemen met polit
01/03/18Mail naar de raadsleden v
 Fotoalbum zendmasten
 Wetenschappelijke illustraties
USA: Court rules against cell tower company    
Ga naar overzicht berichten in: Juridische Informatie

USA: Court rules against cell tower company
woensdag, 14 oktober 2015 - Dossier: Juridische informatie

13 okt. 2015

A state appellate court upheld a local judge's ruling that a telecommunications tower erected near the property of a Muskogee County man constitutes a private nuisance that must be abated by removal.

A lawyer representing the defendants named in the lawsuit filed by Ken Laubenstein and Billie Wallace said it is too early to know how his clients plan to proceed. They could ask the Oklahoma Civil Court of Appeals to reconsider its opinion, which was released Friday, or petition the Oklahoma Supreme Court for further review.

''I really can't tell you what the plan is,'' Thomas Marcum, who represents BoDe Tower, said Monday afternoon. ''I just received the opinion ... so I really can't tell you what the plan is.''

The lawsuit was filed in 2010 after a 250-foot cell tower was built near Laubenstein's property — a nearly 170-acre ''wildlife sanctuary'' that is listed on the Oklahoma Natural Areas Registry — and tried in 2013 by Muskogee County Associate District Judge Norman D. Thygesen. After the trial, which lasted five days during the course of about eight months, Thygesen found the structure erected by BoDe Tower to be ''a private nuisance'' that must ''be abated'' and ''removed.''

A private nuisance is something that interferes with ''a person's interest in the private use and enjoyment'' of his or her land. Laubenstein, who is represented by D.D. Hayes, presented evidence that the tower's flashing strobe lights and red beacons constantly shined ''through the 14 rooftop skylights'' of his home.

Defendants contend the tower constitutes a ''legalized nuisance'' that provides improved cell phone service for residents of the Gooseneck Bend area and deny the tower has an adverse ''effect on wildlife.''

Thygesen disagreed. He ordered that the tower be removed within 60 days of his ruling but stayed the order and allowed it to stand pending the outcome of the appeal. Appellate Court Judge Deborah B. Barnes agreed with Thygesen, noting that ''the tower sticks out like a sore thumb'' over Laubenstein's property.

''His property was so pristine prior to the construction of the tower that during the day he could he could pursue a hobby in nature photography,'' Barnes wrote in the opinion. ''Now, during the day, he can still pursue this hobby, but a reflection of the tower is cast across almost the entire surface of the lake — a reflection which follows the view wherever he/she is positioned about the water — and a white strobe light constantly flashes 'like a big flashbulb going off every second' through the day. ...''

The appellate court found that the tower ''annoys'' and ''injures'' Laubenstein's ''comfort'' and ''repose.''

Ga terug naar het hoofdmenu
Afdrukken | Vragen | RSS | Disclaimer