Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Wilson v. Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC”
Baatz v. Columbia Gas Transmission, LLCpublic domain
Thomas M. Parker, United States Magistrate Judge I. Introduction Plaintiffs in this action are the owners of residential lots in Medina County, Ohio ("Landowners"). Defendant Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC ("Columbia") is a wholesale producer and distributor of natural gas which established a 10,000 acre underground natural gas storage facility in the Clinton sandstone formation in Medina County (th
Richard Baatz v. Columbia Gas Transmissionpublic domain
JOHN K. BUSH, Circuit Judge. Richard Baatz and fifty other landowners in Medina, Ohio ("Landowners") appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment to Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC ("Columbia Gas") on Landowners' state-law trespass and unjust enrichment claims involving underground storage of natural gas. Among other things, this case concerns an unusual situation in which, as t
Richard Baatz v. Columbia Gas Transmissionpublic domain
OPINION COLE, Chief Judge. The Plaintiffs-Appellants, a group of almost 40 landowners in Medina, Ohio, (the “Medina Landowners”) sued Columbia Gas Transmission in the Northern District of Ohio for storing natural gas under their property without compensation in violation of the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. § 717f. The district court dismissed the case unde
Columbia Gas v. Baileypublic domain
[Cite as Columbia Gas v. Bailey, 2023-Ohio-1245.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT UNION COUNTY COLUMBIA GAS OF OHIO, INC., PETITIONER-APPELLANT/ CASE NO. 14-22-13 CROSS-APPELLEE, v. PATRICK E. BAILEY, ET AL., OPINION RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES/ CROSS-APPELLANTS. COLUMBIA GAS OF OHIO, INC.,
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SUSAN RICHARD NELSON, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court on the following motions: (1) Defendant Essar Steel Minnesota LLC’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction [Doc. No. 856]; (2) Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 812]; (3) Plaintiffs Motion in Limine [Doc. No. 835];
701 F.Supp.2d 921 (2010) AMERICAN ENERGY CORP., et al., Plaintiffs, v. TEXAS EASTERN TRANSMISSION, LP, Defendant. Case No. 2:09-cv-623. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division. March 23, 2010. *923 John Elliot Jevicky, A. Hunt Marckwald, Jr., Jeffrey A. Willis, William M. Mattes, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP, Cincin
Paccar Inc. v. Elliot Wilson Capitol Trucks LLCpublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION SUSAN K. GAUVEY, United States Magistrate Judge. Pending before the Court are Peterbilt Motors Company’s, John C. Arscott’s, Peterbilt of Baltimore LLC’s, and Pete Store — Delaware’s motions to dismiss the counterclaim of Elliot Wilson Capitol Trucks LLC. (ECF No. 55, 56 respectively). Briefing is complete. A hearing was held on October 25, 2012. For the reasons set forth herein
Baumann v. District of Columbiapublic domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY, District Judge. Plaintiff Kristopher Baumann, Chairman of the District of Columbia Fraternal Order of Police (“FOP”) and an Officer with the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department (“MPD”), brings this action against the District of Columbia, Chief of Police Cathy L. Lanier, Assistant Chief Patrick Burk
Ridge Natural Resources, LLC, Calvin Smajstrla, Christopher Hawa and Wilson Hawa v. Double Eagle Royalty, LPpublic domain
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS § RIDGE NATURAL RESOURCES, L.L.C, CALVIN SMAJSTRLA, CHRISTOPHER § HAWA, and WILSON HAWA, No. 08-17-00227-CV § Appellants,
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS HJSA NO. 3, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, § No. 08-18-00113-CV Appellant, § Appeal from the v.
Transcon. Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Certain Easementspublic domain
Matthew W. Brann, United States District Judge I. BACKGROUND On October 26, 2018, Plaintiff, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC, hereinafter "Transco," filed a complaint in condemnation pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 71.1 and the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. § 717
NUMBER 13-05-463-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
ACCEPTED 06-15-00044-CV SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 10/20/2015 7:43:29 PM
Board of Commissioners v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.public domain
*720 PRISCILLA R. OWEN, Circuit Judge: The Board of Commissioners of the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority-East filed a lawsuit in Louisiana state court against various companies involved in the exploration for and production of oil reserves off the southern coast of the United States. The Bo
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-19-00401-CV ___________________________ JOE GRISEL, DAVID MORRISON, HMCRT, LLC, ENVISAGE CAPITAL, LLC, CYNDEX SERVICES, LLC, WANDA J. BARRERAS, AND C-7 DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, LLC, Appellants V. EVEREST INTE
Opinion for the Court filed by Senior Circuit Judge SENTELLE. SENTELLE, Senior Circuit Judge: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) entered an order granting a certificate of public convenience and *766 necessity for the construction of a natural gas pipeline con
NO. 12-22-00103-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS EAGLE RAILCAR SERVICES, L.P., § APPEAL FROM THE 3RD EAGLE RAILCAR SERVICES - ROSCOE, INC., EAGLE RAILCAR SERVICES - CAIRO, OHIO, LLC AND EAGLE RAILCAR SERVICES - WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, LLC, APPELLANTS/CROSS-APPELLEES,
Laclede Gas Company v. St. Charles Countypublic domain
KOPF, District Judge. This dispute involves the rights of a local government, St. Charles County, Missouri (“County”), and the rights of a public utility, Laclede Gas Company (“Laclede”), in shared easements. The County takes the position that Laclede must alter or relo*415cate its gas lines -without compensation if the County so demands. Laclede disagrees and, so far
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 17-0332 444444444444 BARROW-SHAVER RESOURCES COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. CARRIZO OIL & GAS, INC., RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 ON PETITION FOR REVIE
Board of Commissioners v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.public domain
ORDER NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN, District Judge. Before the Court is Defendants’ “Joint Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Under Rule 12(b)(6).”1 Having considered the motion, the memoranda in support, the memoranda in opposition, the statements at oral argument, the Petition, and the applicable law, the Court will grant the motion with respect to each of