The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals is considering the appeal involving the 2009 retrial on clean-air rule violations at a coal-fired
power plant in southeast Indiana.
On Sept. 20, a federal appellate panel made up of Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook and Judges Richard Posner and Illana Diamond
Rovner took up the case of U.S. and Hoosier Environmental Council, et al. v. Cinergy Corp., Nos. 09-3351, 09-3344,
and 09-3350. The issues are whether U.S. District Judge Larry McKinney in May 2009 erred in admitting certain expert witness
testimony and also whether he erred in instructing the jury on a standard that wasn’t in place at the time of the projects.
The case dating to 1999 involves violations to parts of the Clean Air Act intended to make sure that older power plants that
have major upgrades also meet more modern pollution limits with new permitting and emissions controls. In a partial retrial
of some claims after the original May 2008 verdict that went mostly in the utility company’s favor, jurors found that
Duke – which bought Cinergy in 2006 – violated the law in two of its projects at three power plants but did not
violate the law on four other projects.
At issue now on appeal is the standard used in determining whether regulations were enforceable under the federal act and
whether some of the expert testimony the court permitted should not have been allowed.
The judges grilled attorneys Peter Keisler for Cinergy and Jason Dunn for the federal government about certain expert opinions
and the reliability of their testimony. The judges took the case under advisement after listening to both sides.
Rehearing "Cinergy trial ends with split verdict" IL May 27 - June 9, 2009
on Facebook & Twitter
Back to Top
The court of appeals not only tries to rewrite or interpret the law to suit their fancy, now they choose play stupid as well. Every consideration must be given to pro se litigants, who are not held to the same standards as attorneys, as stated by,SCOTUS. I assume they didn't have a lawyer, since one wasn't mentioned and I strongly suggest thatb the rest of the, origional petitioners get back in there and fight for their rights.
the irony of situations like this is that the clients whom conour cheated are the ones who should be pulling hardest for him to remain free and keep his law license, so they have some hopes of him paying back. really bury the guy deep and then there will be little hope of restitution
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.