11th Circuit Issues Pipeline Ruling Against Landowners
Represented by a team from Alston & Bird, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co. won what it called an important victory allowing it access to property while lawsuits seeking to block construction are still pending.
December 10, 2018 at 03:12 PM
4 minute read
The Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Co. and its Atlanta lawyers have won an important victory with a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit approving a 115-mile path through private property in Northwest Georgia.
“We conclude that the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of Transcontinental on its claim for condemnation under the Natural Gas Act,” Judge Julie Carnes said in a 90-page opinion released Thursday. “We further conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction granting Transcontinental immediate access to Defendants' properties conditioned on Transcontinental posting a surety bond in an amount equal to twice the appraised values of the interests condemned.”
The panel joining Carnes included Judge Jill Pryor with Judge Anne Conway of the Middle District of Florida, sitting by designation. They affirmed U.S. District Judge Eleanor Ross of the Northern District of Georgia.
William Clay Massey of Alston & Bird argued for the company at oral arguments in September. His team included Nowell Berreth, Phil Sandick, Nicole DeMoss and Tony Greene. Alston & Bird deferred to the company for comment. A spokesman for Transcontinental issued a statement applauding the decision.
Transcontinental said the decision “settled or confirmed in our favor many condemnation issues with broader application” to other projects. Carnes has provided “a clear road map for deciding in our favor a wide variety of challenges that are made to our use of eminent domain under the Natural Gas Act, both in the District Courts within the Eleventh Circuit and elsewhere,” Transcontinental said.
“The Eleventh Circuit joins other U.S. Circuit Courts around the country in holding that a district court may, in appropriate circumstances, issue a preliminary injunction granting a pipeline company immediate access to property that it has an established right to condemn under the Natural Gas Act,” Transcontinental said. “Gaining immediate access is a key step in the efficient and timely construction of interstate natural gas transmission pipelines.”
The ruling came as a blow to property owners affected. They have a long list of attorneys. Donald Evans Jr. of Evans Law Firm in Cartersville took the lead at oral arguments.
“My landowners are, of course, disappointed by the Eleventh Circuit's ruling,” Evans said Friday. “It's been two years since this case was filed. The pipeline is completely built. They've been running gas through it for over a year, and my clients haven't been paid a cent for the occupation of their property. That among many other issues are real concerns when the federal court has allowed the district court discretion to override eminent domain law.”
Evans said the courts “have essentially created a judicial method of condemnation for pipeline companies that enables them to take land faster, easier and more cheaply than the United States itself could take it. He said the “delegated power these companies enjoy is greater than that of the sovereign nation itself.”
The battle goes back to 2013, when Transcontinental first began contacting land owners in the area in which the company planned to place a natural gas pipeline connecting the Gulf Coast to New York City, according to Carnes.
In 2015, Transcontinental applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing it to construct a new natural gas pipeline in northwest Georgia, as well as related facilities in Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia.
The new 115-mile lateral pipeline was planned to run from a compressor station on Transcontinental's mainline in Coweta County, Georgia, to meter stations in Murray County, near the city of Dalton. The purpose of the project was to enable Transcontinental to transport natural gas extracted from the Marcellus shale and other supply basins in the northeastern United States to customers in the Southeast and Gulf Coast, Carnes said. Transcontinental was to receive the gas at a point on its mainline in Mercer County, New Jersey, and deliver it to an interconnection with another company's pipeline in Mississippi. Along the way, Transcontinental would provide natural gas to its customers, including, through the new lateral pipeline, communities in northwest Georgia. This project, which included both the new lateral pipeline and the related facilities on Transcontinental's mainline, was called the Dalton Expansion Project.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOn The Move: Ex-Partner Returns to Lead Nelson Mullins Corporate Group, Burr & Forman Hires University GC as COO
5 minute readLaw Firm Sued for Telemarketing Calls to Customers on Do Not Call Registry
Evidence Explained: Prevailing Attorney Outlines Successful Defense in Inmate Death Case
Trending Stories
- 1We the People?
- 2New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 3No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 4Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 5Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250