Cases 31 - 40 of 1,257
Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC v. 1.77 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, PERMANENT EASEMENT (PIPELINE RIGHT-OF-WAY), 9.55 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, TEMPORARY WORK SPACE, 0.05 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, TEMPORARY ACCESS ROAD EASEMENT A et al
as 3:2022cv00236
Plaintiff:
Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC
Defendant:
1.77 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, PERMANENT EASEMENT (PIPELINE RIGHT-OF-WAY), 9.55 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, TEMPORARY WORK SPACE, 0.05 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, TEMPORARY ACCESS ROAD EASEMENT A, Texas Reunion, LLLP, Boa Sorte Limited Partnership and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
STATE OF INDIANA v. NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY et al
as 1:2022cv01090
Plaintiff:
STATE OF INDIANA
Defendant:
NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, Unknown Owner and Any Heirs, Devisees, Legatees, Successors, Assigns, Executors, Trustees, Receivers, Agents and Representatives and All Other Unknown Persons or Entities Claiming An Interest in the R, INDIANA DELAWARE COUNTY and others
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK) v. SUBLEASE INTEREST OBTAINED PURSUANT TO AN ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF LEASEHOLD INTEREST MADE AS OF JANUARY 25, 2007 et al
as 1:2022cv01043
Plaintiff:
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK)
Defendant:
SUBLEASE INTEREST OBTAINED PURSUANT TO AN ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF LEASEHOLD INTEREST MADE AS OF JANUARY 25, 2007, UNION STATION INVESTCO, LLC, UNION STATION SOLE MEMBER, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1358 Land Condemnation
Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC v. 2.032 acres of land, more or less, permanent easement (pipeline right-of-way) et al
as 1:2022cv00150
Plaintiff:
Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC
Defendant:
2.032 acres of land, more or less, permanent easement (pipeline right-of-way), 4.695 acres of land, more or less, temporary work space, in JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS, Tract No. TX-JEFF-FG-002, Robert c Hicks, Vivian Todd and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPE LINE COMPANY, LP v. BUCKEYE TERMINALS, LLC et al
as 1:2022cv00544
Plaintiff:
PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPE LINE COMPANY, LP
Defendant:
BUCKEYE TERMINALS, LLC, 3.181 ACRES OF REAL ESTATE IN MARION COUNTY, INDIANA, 9.516 ACRES OF REAL ESTATE IN MARION COUNTY, INDIANA and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
WBI Energy Transmission, Inc. v. 80.36 rods, more or less, located in Township 145 North, Range 82 West Section 22: W/2NW/4 McLean County, North Dakota et al
as 1:2022cv00032
Plaintiff:
WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.
Defendant:
80.36 rods, more or less, located in Township 145 North, Range 82 West Section 22: W/2NW/4 McLean County, North Dakota, 169.56 rods, more or less, located in Township 145 North, Range 82 West Section 23: N/2NE/4 McLean County, North Dakota, Falkirk Mining Company and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
Northern Natural Gas Company v. Tract No. LI 246 et al
as 4:2021cv04144
Plaintiff:
Northern Natural Gas Company
Defendant:
Tract No. LI 246, Howard D. Van De Vendel, Edna Van De Vendel and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co., LP v. Wegener et al
as 2:2021cv04145
Plaintiff:
Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, LP
Defendant:
Kevin W Wegener, 0.43 Acrea of Real Estate In Moniteau County, Missouri, Unknown Owners and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, L.P. v. Simon et al
as 2:2021cv04141
Plaintiff:
Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, L.P.
Defendant:
Wayne A Simon, Karen M Simon, Public Water Supply District No. 1 of Pettis, Johnson, and Saline Counties, Missouri and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPE LINE COMPANY, LP v. LEHMAN et al
as 2:2021cv00258
Plaintiff:
PANHANDLE EASTERN PIPE LINE COMPANY, LP
Defendant:
William L Lehman, Rebecca A Lehman, WILLIAM L. LEHMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
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.
