Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation v. Permanent Easements of 2,265 Square Feet, Part of Block 6140, Lot 1 in the County of Kings, State of New York et al
as 1:2013cv02845
Defendant: City of New York and Permanent Easements of 2,265 Square Feet, Part of Block 6140, Lot 1 in the County of Kings, State of New York
Plaintiff: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
Gilliland et al v. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation
as 2:2009cv00775
Plaintiff: Joseph Earl Gilliland and Francis Ann Gilliland
Defendant: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation and Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Type: Contract Plaintiff
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation v. 332/1000 of an Acre of Unimproved Land Situated at 1901 Marriottsville Road, Marriottsville, Howard County, Maryland 21104 et al
as 1:2008cv00828
Defendant: 332/1000 of an Acre of Unimproved Land Situated at 1901 Marriottsville Road, Marriottsville, Howard County, Maryland 21104, Richard A. Pruitt and Peggy Pruitt
Plaintiff: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation and Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Type: Real Property None
Transcontinental Gas pipe Line Corporation v. Virginia Run Community Association et al
as 1:2007cv00521
Plaintiff: Transcontinental Gas pipe Line Corporation
Defendant: Virginia Run Community Association and 9,713.88 Square Feet of Land, More or Less, Located in Fairfax County, Virginia
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0717 Natural Gas Act - Land Condemnation
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation v. Bosley et al
as 1:2007cv01278
Plaintiff: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation and Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation
Defendant: Kenneth T. Bosley, Phyllis Bunker Bosley and Balama Farms, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 9607 Real Property Tort to Land
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE CORPORATION v. 0.095 ACRES OF LAND IN THE TOWNSHIP OF HILLSBOROUGH, SOMERSET COUNTY, NEW JERSEY et al
as 3:2007cv01850
Plaintiff: TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE CORPORATION
Defendant: 0.095 ACRES OF LAND IN THE TOWNSHIP OF HILLSBOROUGH, SOMERSET COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, ROBERT P. POWERS and VALOR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE CORPORATION v. 0.259 ACRES OF LAND IN THE TOWNSHIP OF OLD BRIDGE, MIDDLESEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY et al
as 3:2007cv00390
Plaintiff: TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE CORPORATION
Defendant: 0.259 ACRES OF LAND IN THE TOWNSHIP OF OLD BRIDGE, MIDDLESEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, BASIN REALTY, ELEANOR B SINETT and others
Movant: JOAN THOMAS
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation v. Lands in the County of Kings et al
as 1:2007cv00009
Plaintiff: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation
Defendant: Lands in the County of Kings, County of Richmond, County of New York and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
Transcon Gas Pipel v. FERC, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 06-1286
Petitioner: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation
Respondent: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and United States of America
Intervenor: Piedmont Natural Gas Company, Inc., Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, Northeast Energy Associates and others
Williams Gas Proc, et al v. FERC, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 05-1342
Petitioner: Williams Gas Processing - Gulf Coast Company, L. P. and Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation
Respondent: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and United States of America
Intervenor For Respondent: Producer Coalition, Dominion Exploration & Production, Inc., Forest Oil Corporation and others
: and

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.


Why Is My Information Online?