Sixth Circuit Real Property Cases
Cases 21 - 30 of 582
United States of America upon the relation and for the use of the Tennessee Valley Authority v. Kiser et al
as 3:2024cv00047
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA upon the relation and for the use of the TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, and United States of America upon the relation and for the use of the Tennessee Valley Authority
Defendant:
Jack A. Kiser, Gerda Kiser, Jack Allen Kiser and others
Cause Of Action: 43 U.S.C. § 945 Compensation for Land Condemnation
United States of America upon the relation and for the use of the Tennessee Valley Authority, v. An Easement and Right -of-Way over 1.64 Acres of Land, More or Less, in Knox County Tennessee, and Sonya R. Ogle, et al. et al
as 3:2024cv00049
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA upon the relation and for the use of the TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, and United States of America upon the relation and for the use of the Tennessee Valley Authority
Defendant:
An Easement and Right -of-Way over 1.64 Acres of Land, More or Less, in Knox County Tennessee, and Sonya R. Ogle, et al., Sonya R. Ogle, Mark A. Ogle and others
Cause Of Action: 43 U.S.C. § 945 Compensation for Land Condemnation
United States of America upon the relation and for the use of the Tennessee Valley Authority v. An Easement and Right -of-Way over 0.98 Acre of Land, More or Less, in Knox County Tennessee, et al
as 3:2024cv00037
Plaintiff:
United States of America upon the relation and for the use of the Tennessee Valley Authority
Defendant:
An Easement and Right -of-Way over 0.98 Acre of Land, More or Less, in Knox County Tennessee and Joyce Fritts
Cause Of Action: 43 U.S.C. § 945 Compensation for Land Condemnation
HRT Enterprises v. City of Detroit, MI
as 24-1068
Plaintiff:
HRT ENTERPRISES
Defendant:
CITY OF DETROIT, MI
United States of America v. Easements and Rights-of-Way over 0.37 acre of Land, More or Less, and additional Rights with Respect to an Existing Easement and Right-of-Way over Land in Clinton County, Kentucky et al
as 1:2023cv00162
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Easements and Rights-of-Way over 0.37 acre of Land, More or Less, and additional Rights with Respect to an Existing Easement and Right-of-Way over Land in Clinton County, Kentucky, Luther C. Conner, Jr. and Susan Conner
Cause Of Action: 16 U.S.C. § 0831 Actions re: rights of Tennessee Valley Authority
United States of America v. A Temporary Right to Enter Upon Land in Warren County, Kentucky et al
as 1:2023cv00155
Defendant:
Bill Jenkins, A Temporary Right to Enter Upon Land in Warren County, Kentucky, William D. Jenkins and others
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 16 U.S.C. § 0831 Actions re: rights of Tennessee Valley Authority
United States of America v. An Easement and Right-of-Way Over 1.89 Acers of Land, More or Less, in Montgomery County, Tennessee et al
as 3:2023cv01212
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
An Easement and Right-of-Way Over 1.89 Acers of Land, More or Less, in Montgomery County, Tennessee, Sanderson Pipe Corporation and An Easement and Right-of-Way Over 1.89 Acres of Land, More or Less, in Montgomery County, Tennessee
Cause Of Action: 16 U.S.C. § 0831 Tennessee Valley Authority Act
ANR Pipeline Company v. 35.64 Acres of Land, More or Less et al
as 4:2023cv00113
Plaintiff:
ANR Pipeline Company
Defendant:
35.64 Acres of Land, More or Less and Jared Warren
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC v. 171.54 Acres Of Land, More Or Less, In Fairfield,, et al
as 23-3792
Plaintiff / Appellee:
COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC
Defendant:
171.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, IN FAIRFIELD, HOCKING, MONROE, MORGAN, MUSKINGUM, NOBLE, PERRY, AND VINTON
Defendant / Appellant:
BLACKHAWK LAND AND RESOURCES, LLC
HRT Enterprises v. City of Detroit, MI
as 23-1855
Plaintiff / Appellee:
HRT ENTERPRISES
Defendant / Appellant:
CITY OF DETROIT, MI
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
