Muscarello v. Winnebago County Board

702 F.3d 909 (2012)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Muscarello v. Winnebago County Board

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
702 F.3d 909 (2012)

Facts

Patricia Muscarello (plaintiff) owned three tracts of land zoned for agricultural use in Winnebago County, Illinois (the county). In 2009, the county amended a zoning ordinance to change the procedure by which property owners could obtain permits to build wind farms. The changes made obtaining a permit easier. Muscarello was opposed to wind farms, and she brought an action against the county board, the county zoning board of appeals, some county officials, and several wind-farm companies (defendants) to challenge the 2009 ordinance. Muscarello asserted numerous claims under the United States and Illinois Constitutions, including that the 2009 ordinance constituted a taking of Muscarello’s property and deprived her of her property without due process of law. Muscarello claimed that if a wind farm were allowed on adjacent land, Muscarello’s properties would be harmed and lose value. Muscarello alleged that the wind farm could create severe noise, increase shadow flicker, throw ice from spinning windmill blades, potentially throw the windmill blades themselves, interfere with wireless communications, increase electromagnetic radiation, prevent crop-dusting operations, and reduce the downwind wind speed. When Muscarello brought her action, no one had yet applied for a permit to build a wind farm in the county under the 2009 ordinance. Moreover, Muscarello did not live on any of the allegedly affected properties, and whether Muscarello conducted any agricultural activities on the properties was unclear. However, Muscarello asserted that she knew of a wind farm that a company wanted to build near one of her properties and that a wind company had approached Muscarello to purchase a wind easement. The district court dismissed Muscarello’s complaint for failure to state a claim, and Muscarello appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 806,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership