Colorado Interstate Gas Company v. Wright et al

Plaintiff: Colorado Interstate Gas Company
Defendant: Thomas E. Wright, Joseph F. Harkins, Michael C. Moffet, Douglas Louis and Daniel Fredlund
Case Number: 5:2009cv04031
Filed: March 25, 2009
Court: Kansas District Court
Office: Constitutional - State Statute Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Richard D. Rogers
Referring Judge: K. Gary Sebelius
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 28:2201 Declaratory Judgement

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
April 13, 2010 27 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. The court grants the 24 Motion of defendants' for leave to file surreply; grants 19 Motion of plaintiff for summary judgment; and denies the 23 Cross-Motion of defendants' for summary judgment. It is further or dered that the Kansas Gas Storage Statutes, K.S.A. §§ 55-1, 115 and 55-182(a), and the Kansas Gas Storage Regulations, §§ 82-3-105, 82-3-113, 82-3-114, 82-3-117, 82-3-120, and 82-3-1000 thru 82-3-1012, are found to violate the Sup remacy Clause, to be pre-empted by the NGA and the PSA, and to have no force or effect on the plaintiff's interstate natural gas pipeline, storage facilities and transportation at CIG's Boehm Underground Gas Storage Field. It is further or dered that the clerk of the court shall enter this declaratory judgment for the plaintiff and against the defendats, with costs taxed to the defendant. Because the plaintiff's brief fails to address and establish the present need for injunctive relief, the court will not grant the same at this time, but will be permitted to renew this request should declaratory relief later prove to be an inadequate remedy. See attached for more details. Signed by U.S. District Senior Judge Sam A. Crow on 4/13/10. (bmw)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Kansas District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Colorado Interstate Gas Company v. Wright et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Colorado Interstate Gas Company
Represented By: Teresa J. James
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Thomas E. Wright
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Joseph F. Harkins
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Michael C. Moffet
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Douglas Louis
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Daniel Fredlund
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.