• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Experienced Indiana Law Firm | Trial Lawyers Giving Power to Your Voice for Over 55 Years

CohenMalad, LLP | Trial Lawyers Giving Power to Your Voice for Over 55 Years

CohenMalad is rated highly on Google Reviews by clients.
Toll Free866.446.7478Toll Free317.636.6481
Make a Payment free consult
  • English
  • Español

Search

  • About Us
  • Attorneys
  • Services
    • Appellate Law
    • Business Services & Litigation
    • Class Action
    • Eminent Domain
    • Family Law
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Personal Injury
    • Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Litigation
    • Real Estate Services & Litigation
    • Sexual Abuse
  • Testimonials
  • Resources
    • Alerts
    • Firm News
    • Video Library
    • Blog
    • FAQs
  • Contact
  • English
    • Español

Update on Indiana Eminent Domain Law: Duke Energy, LLC v. Bellwether Properties, LLC

Home » Our Blog » Update on Indiana Eminent Domain Law: Duke Energy, LLC v. Bellwether Properties, LLC

By CohenMalad, LLP

Bellwether Properties, LLC, (“Bellwether”) owned property encumbered by a 10’ utility easement owned by Duke Energy, Indiana (“Duke”). Duke owned a transmission power line that ran through the property centered within the easement area. Bellwether wanted to build a warehouse on its property abutting the easement. Duke informed them that the electrical safety code would not allow Bellwether to build within 12.5 feet of the power line, some of which was outside of the 10’ Duke easement. Bellwether sued Duke for inverse condemnation, claiming that Duke had taken part of its land without compensation by disallowing Bellwether to utilize the property abutting the easement for the warehouse.

The parties disagreed whether Bellwether’s claim was an issue of a physical taking or a regulatory taking. A physical taking is one where the government acquires the private property for a public purpose as opposed to a regulatory taking where the government’s regulation of the property is so onerous that it in effect has taken the property. The court recognized two categories of regulatory action that are deemed regulatory takings: (1) where government requires an owner to suffer a permanent physical invasion of her property and (2) regulations that completely deprive an owner of all economically beneficial use of their property.

The Court treated the claim as a regulatory taking and examined the case under the lens of Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City and weighed the factors created by the US Supreme Court for regulatory takings – (1) the economic impact of the regulation on the property owner, (2) the character of the governmental action and (3) if there was a physical invasion as opposed to a public program adjusting the benefits and burdens to the property owner to promote the common good. Using the Penn Central factors, the court determined that the economic impact to the Bellwether property was minimal. The warehouse to be built had to be resized by only 150 square feet and it reduced the number of storage racks in the building from thirty to twenty-nine. The court also found that the electrical code clearance standard had already been in the Indiana Administrative Code when Bellwether purchased the property and property owners are charged with knowledge of the laws that affect their property. Further, the clearance was intended to protect lives and property from being too close to electric transmission lines, which is applied across the board, not just to the Bellwether property.

Because Bellwether did not meet the standard set forth in Penn Central, the court ultimately found that the prohibition of building the warehouse, even outside the easement area, was not a compensable taking by Duke. The decision in Duke Energy, Indiana, LLC v. Bellwether Properties, LLC affirms a condemnor’s rights within right of way easements and should serve as a caveat to landowners to carefully consider easements when considering current and future property improvements. I have practiced eminent domain condemnation law for over a decade and accept case referrals from attorneys across Indiana and represent commercial, agricultural and residential landowners to assert their rights and maximize compensation in land acquisition transactions.

Article by: Lindsey M. Bennett, attorney

 

Primary Sidebar

ASK ABOUT AN INITIAL FREE CONSULTATION TODAY

  • Hidden
  • Hidden
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

CohenMalad, LLP

One Indiana Square Suite 1400
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
317.636.6481
Toll Free: 866.446.7478
  • twitter logo

Copyright © 2025 CohenMalad, LLP
Disclaimer Privacy Policy

  • About Us
  • Attorneys
  • Services
    ▼
    • Appellate Law
    • Business Services & Litigation
    • Class Action
    • Eminent Domain
    • Family Law
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Personal Injury
    • Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Litigation
    • Real Estate Services & Litigation
    • Sexual Abuse
  • Testimonials
  • Resources
    ▼
    • Alerts
    • Firm News
    • Video Library
    • Blog
    • FAQs
  • Contact
  • English
    ▼
    • Español
Cookies and other technology are used on this website to tailor your user experience and evaluate our marketing strategy. By clicking any link on this site you agree to our privacy policy.
En este sitio web utilizamos cookies y otras tecnologías para personalizar su experiencia de usuario y evaluar nuestra estrategia de marketing. Al hacer clic en cualquier enlace de esta plataforma, usted acepta nuestra política de privacidad.
Agree