The Court affirmed the trial court ruling that there was evidence from which the jury could have concluded defendant breached the use clause of the leasing contract it had with plaintiff to build soceer fields on plaintiff's property by its over-illumination of the field lights, which caused light trespass and glare.
Plaintiff church (Prince of Peace) leased part of its land to defendant Solar Socceer Club (Solar) to build soccer fields on Prince of Peace's undeveloped property. In the contract, the parties agreed Solar would use the fields primarily on evenings and weekends, while Prince of Peace would use the fields during the school day for the students in its school. Prince of Peace filed suit against Solar for breach of contract with regard to four provisions, including whether use of the field lights "exceeded the City of Carrollton's standards for light trespass and glare, by as much as six to twelve times the maximum in some locations."
The Court found no substantial evidence that the School District's proposed field lighting would have a significant effect on the environment due to the limited hours of operation, limited evening events, and low number of residences impacted in excess of 0.8 foot-candles. The Court also found that the lighting would not substantially impact the historic aesthetic of the neighborhood.
Organization of school spending activists objected to the installation of high school stadium field lighting and other renovations on grounds of waste of funds, violation of zoning laws, and environmental concerns (including light trespass, glare, and sleep disruption). A consultant group stated that the sky glow and glare caused by the project would have a less than significant impact. Trial Court ruled in favor of the school district.