As commercial solar installations continue to expand across the United States, disputes involving developers, property owners, contractors, utilities, lenders, and equipment manufacturers have become increasingly common. While many of these disputes share similar themes, contract interpretation, construction defects, delayed interconnection, and performance guarantees, the governing legal framework varies significantly from state to state.

For businesses investing millions of dollars in solar infrastructure, understanding these differences is essential. Florida and New York represent two distinct approaches to commercial solar regulation, permitting, and litigation. In addition, federal law frequently intersects with state law, particularly when tax incentives, bankruptcy, interstate commerce, or federal energy regulations are involved.

Common Types of Commercial Solar Disputes

Commercial solar projects involve multiple parties operating under separate contracts. Even well-planned projects can encounter legal challenges such as:

• Construction delays
• Cost overruns
• Engineering or design defects
• Equipment failures
• Underperforming solar systems
• Breach of EPC (Engineering, Procurement, and Construction) contracts
• Interconnection disputes with electric utilities
• Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) disagreements
• Property access and easement conflicts
• Insurance coverage disputes
• Warranty claims
• Payment disputes among contractors and subcontractors

Because solar projects often span months or years, changing regulations and market conditions can further complicate contractual obligations.

Florida State

Florida has experienced rapid commercial solar growth, driven by abundant sunshine and increasing corporate demand for renewable energy. However, unlike some northeastern states, Florida historically has maintained a more utility-centered regulatory structure.

Several characteristics influence commercial solar disputes in Florida.

Utility Relationships

Most commercial projects require coordination with investor-owned utilities. Delays involving interconnection approvals, technical requirements, or infrastructure upgrades may become significant sources of conflict.

Disputes often focus on:

• Utility interconnection timelines
• Compliance with technical standards
• Allocation of upgrade costs
• Grid access responsibilities

Construction Litigation

Florida construction law frequently intersects with commercial solar litigation.

Claims commonly involve:

• Delay damages
• Defective workmanship
• Building code compliance
• Roofing damage during installation
• Contractor licensing issues

Because many solar arrays are installed on existing commercial roofs, disagreements regarding structural integrity and responsibility for future roof repairs are relatively common.

Weather-Related Claims

Florida’s hurricane exposure creates unique legal issues.

Insurance disputes may involve:

• Wind damage
• Flood exclusions
• Force majeure provisions
• Contractor obligations after severe weather events

Project owners should carefully review both construction contracts and insurance policies to determine which party bears responsibility following major storms.

New York State

New York has adopted aggressive renewable energy goals through statewide climate initiatives. As a result, commercial solar development often operates within a more extensive regulatory framework than in Florida.

While this environment creates substantial opportunities, it also introduces additional legal complexity.

Incentive Compliance

Many commercial projects rely on state incentive programs.

Disputes may arise over:

• Eligibility requirements
• Project completion deadlines
• Reporting obligations
• Performance verification
• Incentive repayment demands

Failure to satisfy program requirements can jeopardize significant financial benefits.

Land Use and Local Approval Issues

Commercial solar developers in New York frequently encounter local zoning challenges.

Common disputes include:

• Special use permits
• Environmental review
• Agricultural land restrictions
• Municipal approval processes
• Community opposition

Unlike Florida, where commercial rooftop installations are more prevalent, New York experiences a larger number of utility-scale and ground-mounted projects, increasing the likelihood of land use litigation.

Interconnection Delays

New York has experienced substantial demand for utility interconnections.

Developers may face:

• Long utility review periods
• Queue management disputes
• Cost allocation disagreements
• Upgrade responsibility conflicts

These delays can trigger breach of contract claims among project owners, contractors, lenders, and investors.

Federal Law:

Although many disputes are governed by state contract law, federal law often plays a significant role.

Federal issues may involve:

• Federal tax credits
• Treasury guidance
• Bankruptcy proceedings
• Securities regulations
• Interstate power transactions
• Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) oversight
• Tariff and import restrictions affecting solar equipment

When projects involve federal incentives or multistate financing arrangements, parties may find themselves litigating in federal court rather than state court.

Federal Case Study: Utility Interconnection and Federal Jurisdiction

One notable example is Vote Solar v. FERC, where renewable energy organizations challenged aspects of federal transmission planning and interconnection policies affecting renewable energy development.

Although the case focused primarily on federal regulatory authority rather than a single commercial construction dispute, it illustrates an important principle:

Commercial solar projects often depend on federal regulations governing electric transmission and wholesale electricity markets. Changes in federal policy can directly affect project timelines, financing, and contractual obligations.

Developers should recognize that disputes involving transmission access or wholesale energy markets may extend beyond state law into federal administrative proceedings or federal court.

Risk Management Strategies for Commercial Solar Projects

Businesses can reduce litigation risk through proactive planning.

Consider:

• Carefully drafted EPC contracts
• Clearly defined performance guarantees
• Detailed construction schedules
• Well-defined change order procedures
• Comprehensive insurance coverage
• Independent engineering reviews
• Utility coordination early in project planning
• Thorough documentation of project milestones
• Alternative dispute resolution provisions such as mediation or arbitration

Early legal review during contract negotiation often costs substantially less than resolving litigation after construction begins.

Commercial solar development is expected to continue expanding across both Florida and New York. As projects become larger and financing structures grow more sophisticated, disputes are also likely to become more complex.

Businesses operating across multiple states should avoid assuming that legal strategies successful in one jurisdiction will translate directly to another. Differences in state regulations, permitting processes, utility relationships, and incentive programs require careful legal analysis tailored to each project’s location. Whether a dispute involves construction defects, contract interpretation, utility interconnection, or regulatory compliance, early risk assessment and experienced legal counsel remain among the most effective tools for protecting commercial investments.

John Caravella Esq., is a construction attorney and formerly practicing project architect at The Law Office of John Caravella, P.C., representing architects, engineers, contractors, subcontractors, and owners in all phases of contract preparation, litigation, and arbitration across New York and Florida. He also serves as an arbitrator to the American Arbitration Association Construction Industry Panel. Mr. Caravella can be reached by email: [email protected] or (631) 608-1346.

The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only.  Readers of this website should contact their attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular legal matter.  No reader, user, or browser of this site should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this site without first seeking legal advice from counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.  Only your individual attorney can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation.  Use of, and access to, this website or any of the links or resources contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between the reader, user, or browser and website authors, contributors, contributing law firms, or committee members and their respective employers.

Resources:

Federal Resources

• Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC): https://www.ferc.gov
• U.S. Department of Energy – Solar Energy Technologies Office: https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar
• National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL): https://www.nrel.gov
• Internal Revenue Service – Clean Energy Tax Credits: https://www.irs.gov/clean-energy

Florida Resources

• Florida Public Service Commission: https://www.floridapsc.com
• Florida Department of Environmental Protection: https://floridadep.gov
• The Florida Bar – Construction Law Committee: https://www.floridabar.org

New York Resources

• New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA): https://www.nyserda.ny.gov
• New York Public Service Commission: https://dps.ny.gov
• New York State Unified Court System: https://ww2.nycourts.gov

Industry Organizations

• Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA): https://www.seia.org
• Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC): https://irecusa.org
• American Bar Association – Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/environment_energy_resources/