UTILITY LAW
REAL ESTATE LAW
NON PROFIT CORPORATIONS
ESTATE PLANNING
ELDER CARE
CORPORATION AND LLC FORMATION
CONTRACTS
COMMERCIAL LITIGATION
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
 

Experience & Expertise

  • Administrative Law

  • Contracts

  • Elder Care

  • Estate Planning

  • Real Estate Law

  • Utility Law

  • Commercial Litigation

  • LLC Partnership & Formation

  • Non-Profit Corporations

  • Regulatory Law

  • Wills, Trust, & Probate

Specializing in complex contract negotiation, contract preparation, and litigation, the Zachary David Wilson law firm has built a track record of success in cases ranging from environmental law and utilities regulation to estate planning and probate, as well as other areas of family law. Negotiation of complex contracts for large utility companies, whether regulatory or legislative, is a particular specialty of the firm.

 

The firm is experienced in regulatory law and in negotiating and drafting contracts for wholesale power requirements, transmission services, distribution services and other utility services as well as experienced in litigation involving utility issues including territorial disputes, fuel supply, rate making, and anti-competitive issues. Our expertise includes developing Request For Proposals for municipal and cooperative utilities for wholesale power requirements, lobbying and taking an active role in passing or defeating legislation at the Arkansas General Assembly.

 

The firm’s expertise includes representing Electrical and Water Utilities in all of their legal requirements, including negotiating and drafting contracts for wholesale power requirements, transmission services, distribution services and other utility services as well as experienced in litigation involving utility issues including territorial disputes, fuel supply, rate making, and anti-competitive issues.

The firm has appeared before or is admitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Environmental Protection Agency, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Arkansas Public Service Commission, Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, and Arkansas District or Circuit Courts and Federal District Courts, Arkansas Court of Appeals, Arkansas Supreme Court, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court of the United States.

 

Cases

  • City of Osceola vs. Entergy Arkansas, Inc. 791 F.3d 904 (8th Cir. 2015)

 

  • Independence County vs. City of Clarksville, Arkansas 86 S.W.3d 325 (2011); Supreme Court of Arkansas 2012 Ark. 17.

 

  • Craighead Electric Cooperative Corporation vs. City Water & Light Plant of Jonesboro, Arkansas, U.S. District Court and U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit 278 F.3d 859 (2002).

 

  • City of Lamar vs. City of Clarksville, 314 Ark. 413, 863 S.W.2d 805 (1993).

 

  • (Amicus brief for prevailing party) Conway Corp. v. Construction Engineers, Inc., No. 89-34, Supreme Court of Arkansas, 300 Ark. 225; 778 S.W.2d 919; 1989 Ark. LEXIS 485, December 11, 1989.

 

  • Cottonwood Energy Co. LP v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 28152.

 

  • Cottonwood Energy Co. LP v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 21197.

 

  • Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 290 F.3d 362.  (2002)

 

  • City of Benton v. Arkansas Soil & Water Comm’n, 345 Ark. 249.  (2001)

 

  • City of Benton v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 136 F.3d 824.  (1998)

 

  • Cajun Elec. Power Coop. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 28 F.3d 173. (1994)

 

  • New Orleans v. SEC, 969 F.2d 1163.  (1992)

 

  • Leatherwood v. Meisch, 297 Ark. 91.  (1988)

 

  • Arkansas Highway & Transp. Dep’t v. Hope Brick Works, Inc., 294 Ark. 490.  (1988)

 

  • First American Bank, N.A. v. Associated Hosts, Inc., 292 Ark. 445.  (1987)

 

  • Big A Warehouse Distributors, Inc. v. Rye Auto Supply, Inc., 19 Ark. App. 286.  (1986)

 

  • Middle South Energy, Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 747 F.2d 763. (1984)

 

  • Weems v. Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct, 257 Ark. 673.  (1975)

 

  • Hardin v. Devalls Bluff, 256 Ark. 480.  (1974)

  • Union Pacific R.R. vs. Entergy Arkansas Inc., et al. Pulaski County Circuit Court, Docket No. CV2006-2711-6.

Administrative Case Examples

  • Proceeding involving the Midwest Independent System Operator and the operation of its system in relation to the Southwest Power Pool, litigation dealing with the Joint Operating Agreement; Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Docket No. EL11-34, and ongoing matters involving MISO SPP Seams issues.

 

  • Proceeding involving the Entergy Corporation transferring its Transmission facilities to the Midwest Independent System Operator; Arkansas Public Service Commission Docket No. 10-011-U.

 

  • Representing Clients with respect to stakeholder task force and operations in the Midwest Independent System Operator stakeholder groups, related to Auction Revenue Rights and Financial Transmission Rights allocations.  Also representing clients with respect to stakeholder groups with the Southwest Power Pool Independent Coordinator of Transmission on behalf of the Entergy Corporation.

  • Entergy Services Inc., Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Docket No. ER06-719, case involving Entergy Services Formula Rate Update Redeterminations.

 

  • Entergy Services Inc., Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Docket No. ER06-706, case involving Entergy Services Formula Rate Update Redeterminations.

 

  • Representation of various Municipal Clients in integration of existing Power Supply Agreements into SPP Day 2 Market.

 

  • SPP Open Access Transmission Tariff, Docket No. RT-04-1, ER05-1285.

 

  • East Texas Electric Cooperative and Arkansas Electric Cooperative vs. Entergy Corporation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Docket Nos. EL05-15 and EL04-134.

 

  • Salem Water Users Ass’n v. City of Benton, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26536.

  • Entergy Gulf States Merger, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Docket No. EC92-21 and ER92-806.

 

  • Energy Services Inc., Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Docket No. ER91-569, case involving market power investigation concerning Entergy Services and American Electric Power.