Cases 11 - 20 of 22
Spire STL Pipeline LLC v. 1.73 acres of land, more or less, situated in St. Charles County, State of Missouri et al
as 4:2018cv01371
Defendant:
Shell Pipe Line Corporation, 0.99 acres of land, more or less, situated in St. Charles County, State of Missouri, Portage Des Sioux, City of and others
Plaintiff:
Spire STL Pipeline LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
Spire STL Pipeline LLC v. 0.52 acres of land, more or less, situated in St. Charles County, State of Missouri et al
as 4:2018cv01370
Defendant:
0.44 acres of land, more or less, situated in St. Charles County, State of Missouri, Portage Des Sioux, City of, TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and others
Plaintiff:
Spire STL Pipeline LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
Spire STL Pipeline LLC v. 1.78 acres of land, more or less, situated in St. Charles County, State of Missouri et al
as 4:2018cv01363
Defendant:
Stanolind Pipe Line Co., Kathleen C. Thomas, TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and others
Plaintiff:
Spire STL Pipeline LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
Spire STL Pipeline LLC v. 1.18 acres of land, more or less, situated in St. Charles County, State of Missouri et al
as 4:2018cv01353
Defendant:
Shell Pipe Line Corporation, Stanolind Pipe Line Co., 0.59 acres of land, more or less, situated in St. Charles County, State of Missouri and others
Plaintiff:
Spire STL Pipeline LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP et al v. Kerry et al
as 4:2016cv00036
Plaintiff:
TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Oil Pipeline Operations Inc.
Defendant:
John F Kerry , Loretta E. Lynch , Jeh Charles Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Craft-Rendon et al v. TransCanada Corporation et al
as 6:2015cv00374
Respondent:
TransCanada Keystone Pipeline LP , Wood County Texas and Wood County Sherriff's Department
Plaintiff:
Benjamin-Franklin Sequoyah Craft-Rendon and Shannon Kathleen Bebe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Craft-Rendon et al v. TransCanada Corporation et al
as 4:2014cv02675
Defendant:
TransCanada Corporation, Transcanada Keystone Pipeline, LP, Wood County, Texas and others
Plaintiff:
Benjamin-Franklin Sequoyah Craft-Rendon and Shannon Kathleen Bebe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Sierra Club, et al v. Bostick, et al
as 14-6099
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SIERRA CLUB, INC., CLEAN ENERGY FUTURE OKLAHOMA and EAST TEXAS SUB REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
Defendant - Appellee:
THOMAS P. BOSTICK, in his official capacity as Commanding General and Chief of Engineers of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, MICHAEL J. WALSH, in his official capacity as U.S. Army Commanding General for Civil and Emergency Operations, MICHAEL TEAGUE, in his official capacity as Tulsa District Commander of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and others
Intervenor - Appellee:
TRANSCANADA KEYSTONE PIPELINE LP, TRANSCANADA CORPORATION, INTERSTATE NATURAL GAS ASSOCIATION and others
TransCanada Keystone Pipeline LP v. Easements and Rights of Way Across Township 2 North, Range 61 East et al
as 1:2012cv00098
Plaintiff:
TransCanada Keystone Pipeline LP
Defendant:
Easements and Rights of Way Across Township 2 North, Range 61 East, Easements and Rights of Way Across Township 3 North, Range 61 East, Easements and Rights of Way Across Township 21 North, Range 47 East M.P.M and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1358
Sierra Club, et al v. Bostick, et al
as 12-6201
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SIERRA CLUB, INC., CLEAN ENERGY FUTURE OKLAHOMA and EAST TEXAS SUB REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
Defendant - Appellee:
THOMAS P. BOSTICK, in his official capacity as Commanding General and Chief of Engineers of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, MICHAEL J. WALSH, in his official capacity as U.S. Army Commanding General for Civil and Emergency Operations, MICHAEL TEAGUE, in his official capacity as Tulsa District Commander of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and others
Intervenor:
TRANSCANADA KEYSTONE PIPELINE LP, TRANSCANADA CORPORATION, INTERSTATE NATURAL GAS ASSOCIATION and others
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.
