Bellwether Properties, LLC v. Duke Energy Indiana, LLC

[27] The majority determines “neither 170 I.A.C, 4-1-26, nor the 2002 NESC, placed Bellwether on notice that Duke’s control over land surrounding the Easement widened from ten to approximately twenty-three feet due to horizontal strike clearance requirements.” (Op. at 1046.) I believe we are required to hold Bellwether did have notice, and I must therefore respectfully dissent.

[28] The majority correctly notes “the accrual of Bellwether’s claim could not be determined simply by reference to 170 I.A.C. 4-1-26. In fact, such determination could not even be accomplished by referencing the 2002…