This order addresses motions filed by landowners seeking attorneys' fees and costs from Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) following ACP's abandonment of eminent domain proceedings to obtain an easement on the landowners' property for a natural gas pipeline. The court disagrees with a Ninth Circuit decision and finds that, under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act, landowners are entitled to reimbursement of reasonable litigation expenses from the private company exercising federal eminent domain authority. As such, the court will determine appropriate reimbursement for the landowners' attorney fees and costs incurred due to the condemnation proceeding. The court also denies ACP's request for limited discovery on the landowners' fee arrangements with counsel.
This document summarizes the process for appealing court decisions in Kansas. It discusses the types of rulings that can be appealed as of right, such as final judgments, injunctions, and orders involving the constitution. It also outlines the process for appealing these decisions, which involves filing a notice of appeal within 30 days. The document also discusses appealing interlocutory orders by permission, which requires the trial court to state the order involves a controlling legal issue and could expedite the case, and then filing an application for permission to appeal within 14 days. The appellate courts in Kansas are limited to reviewing questions of law and whether facts are supported by evidence.
The court denied the State's motion for reconsideration regarding the court's prior ruling that DHHL requires $28 million or more for its FY 2015-2016 administrative and operating budget. The court found substantial evidence supported its factual finding of the funding amount needed. The court also found that ordering compliance with the constitutional requirement to sufficiently fund DHHL's administrative expenses was an appropriate remedy and did not violate separation of powers, as the Hawaii Supreme Court held this issue was justiciable.
Answering Brief by Newtown Estates Community AssociationAngela Kaaihue
Answering Brief by Newtown Estates Community Association
ANGELA KAAIHUE -VS- NEWTOWN ESTATES COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION- OPENING BRIEF CAAP-19-0000806
NEWTOWN ESTATES COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
Hawaii Appellant Court Supreme Court judge castegnetti, judge jeffrey crabtree, judge karen t. nakasone, judge katherine g. leonard, judge keith hiraoka, judge lisa m. ginoza, judge sonja mccullen, judge clyde j. wadsworth, judge karen holma, judge gary W.B. chang
Newtown Loses By Default Judgment- NECA -vs- KaaihueAngela Kaaihue
Newtown Loses By Default Judgment- NECA -vs- Kaaihue, a five year litigation and court battle. When NECA board of directors, and community are jealous for driving right by a property that could have been purchased, but was inherited by Angela Kaaihue, who has turned the property she inherited into a Hawaiian Gold Mine.
Hawaii Appellant Court Supreme Court judge castegnetti, judge jeffrey crabtree, judge karen t. nakasone, judge katherine g. leonard, judge keith hiraoka, judge lisa m. ginoza, judge sonja mccullen, judge clyde j. wadsworth, judge karen holma, judge gary W.B. chang
This document summarizes the procedures for responding to a civil complaint filed in Kansas state court. It addresses the timeline for filing a response, options for extending the deadline, and types of allowable responses such as an answer, motion to dismiss, or motion for a more definite statement. It provides details on filing pre-answer motions and the procedures that apply, including requirements for papers, the plaintiff's response, optional reply, and whether oral argument or discovery are stayed pending the decision. If a pre-answer motion is denied, the defendant must file a response within 14 days.
Brief against child detention licensingBryan Johnson
This document is an application for a temporary restraining order and temporary injunction filed in Travis County District Court. It seeks to prevent the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services from implementing a new regulation related to licensing immigrant family detention centers as child care facilities. The plaintiffs argue the regulation exceeds DFPS's statutory authority and is invalid for three reasons: 1) it licenses activity prohibited by the Texas Family Code, 2) the legislature has not authorized DFPS to license secure detention facilities, and 3) DFPS lacks adequate resources and standards to properly regulate these large, complex facilities for the first time.
This document summarizes the process for appealing court decisions in Kansas. It discusses the types of rulings that can be appealed as of right, such as final judgments, injunctions, and orders involving the constitution. It also outlines the process for appealing these decisions, which involves filing a notice of appeal within 30 days. The document also discusses appealing interlocutory orders by permission, which requires the trial court to state the order involves a controlling legal issue and could expedite the case, and then filing an application for permission to appeal within 14 days. The appellate courts in Kansas are limited to reviewing questions of law and whether facts are supported by evidence.
The court denied the State's motion for reconsideration regarding the court's prior ruling that DHHL requires $28 million or more for its FY 2015-2016 administrative and operating budget. The court found substantial evidence supported its factual finding of the funding amount needed. The court also found that ordering compliance with the constitutional requirement to sufficiently fund DHHL's administrative expenses was an appropriate remedy and did not violate separation of powers, as the Hawaii Supreme Court held this issue was justiciable.
Answering Brief by Newtown Estates Community AssociationAngela Kaaihue
Answering Brief by Newtown Estates Community Association
ANGELA KAAIHUE -VS- NEWTOWN ESTATES COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION- OPENING BRIEF CAAP-19-0000806
NEWTOWN ESTATES COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
Hawaii Appellant Court Supreme Court judge castegnetti, judge jeffrey crabtree, judge karen t. nakasone, judge katherine g. leonard, judge keith hiraoka, judge lisa m. ginoza, judge sonja mccullen, judge clyde j. wadsworth, judge karen holma, judge gary W.B. chang
Newtown Loses By Default Judgment- NECA -vs- KaaihueAngela Kaaihue
Newtown Loses By Default Judgment- NECA -vs- Kaaihue, a five year litigation and court battle. When NECA board of directors, and community are jealous for driving right by a property that could have been purchased, but was inherited by Angela Kaaihue, who has turned the property she inherited into a Hawaiian Gold Mine.
Hawaii Appellant Court Supreme Court judge castegnetti, judge jeffrey crabtree, judge karen t. nakasone, judge katherine g. leonard, judge keith hiraoka, judge lisa m. ginoza, judge sonja mccullen, judge clyde j. wadsworth, judge karen holma, judge gary W.B. chang
This document summarizes the procedures for responding to a civil complaint filed in Kansas state court. It addresses the timeline for filing a response, options for extending the deadline, and types of allowable responses such as an answer, motion to dismiss, or motion for a more definite statement. It provides details on filing pre-answer motions and the procedures that apply, including requirements for papers, the plaintiff's response, optional reply, and whether oral argument or discovery are stayed pending the decision. If a pre-answer motion is denied, the defendant must file a response within 14 days.
Brief against child detention licensingBryan Johnson
This document is an application for a temporary restraining order and temporary injunction filed in Travis County District Court. It seeks to prevent the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services from implementing a new regulation related to licensing immigrant family detention centers as child care facilities. The plaintiffs argue the regulation exceeds DFPS's statutory authority and is invalid for three reasons: 1) it licenses activity prohibited by the Texas Family Code, 2) the legislature has not authorized DFPS to license secure detention facilities, and 3) DFPS lacks adequate resources and standards to properly regulate these large, complex facilities for the first time.
Request for Entry of Default Judgment in favor for Angela KaaihueAngela Kaaihue
This document is a request for entry of default from Angela Sue Kaaihue and Yong Nam Fryer, who are pro se defendants and counter-claim plaintiffs, against Newtown Estates Community Association. It includes affidavits from Kaaihue and Fryer stating that the association failed to respond to their counter-claim within the required time period. It requests a default judgment of $43,450,000 including principal of $40 million, interest, costs and attorney's fees. Exhibits of the filed counter-claim and proofs of service are attached in support of the request.
FERC Order Denying Rehearing Requested by NY AG Schneiderman re Constitution ...Marcellus Drilling News
New York Attorney General Eric Scheiderman requested the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rehear and investigate the matter of tree clearing in NY along the proposed path of the Constitution Pipeline (still not built). Schneiderman alleged the Constitution should have prevented landowners from clearing trees on their own property ahead of the pipeline's approval by Lord Cuomo. FERC told Schneiderman to get lost--no rehearing of the matter.
This order from a district court concerns a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment that has been filed in a civil case. As one of the defendants is representing himself without an attorney, the court directs the clerk to send him materials to explain summary judgment procedure and relevant extracts from Rules 12 and 56. The defendants have 34 days to respond to the motion. The order also provides guidance on the requirements for affidavits submitted in opposition to summary judgment.
This document appears to be a record of legal filings and judgments in a court case between Sulphur Mountain Land and Livestock Co LLC and several other parties including John Redmond, Maureen Redmond, Geraldine Redmond, and Somerset Farms LLC. It includes filings such as proofs of service, judgments, appeals, motions, and other legal documents spanning from 2005 to 2015 regarding a renewal of judgment, claims of exemption, examinations of judgment debtors, transcripts for appeal, and more. The document provides a chronological record of legal proceedings and filings for this case over a ten year period.
US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - Pollock v Energy Corporation of A...Marcellus Drilling News
On Monday, October 24, 2016, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals found that ECA did not meet its burden of proving its need for a new trial in the case involving a $1.1 million judgment to landowners. The landowners sued ECA in federal court in 2010, alleging they did not receive their proper amount of royalties under their leases because allegedly improper post-production costs were deducted. The District Court jury awarded $1.1 million in damages. ECA appealed the verdict to the Third Circuit.
An Ohio landowner whose land Sunoco Logistics Partners wants to traverse with the Mariner East 2 pipeline tried a novel legal argument. The landowner's attorneys argued in the Ohio Seventh District Court of Appeals that pure propane and pure butane--both of which would be transported through the pipeline from eastern Ohio all the way to the Marcus Hook refinery near Philadelphia--are not "petroleum." At least, not petroleum for the purposes of the permit which grants Sunoco the right to build the pipeline to transport petroleum products. The Court of Appeals justices rejected that argument and said, in essence, that propane and butane fit under the definition of petroleum as that word has been used for generations. This is the court's ruling.
This document is a summary of a United States Tax Court case regarding whether a collection case qualifies for small tax case procedures. The Tax Court held that for a case to qualify under section 7463(f)(2), the total unpaid tax as of the date of the IRS notice of determination cannot exceed $50,000. The amount of the underlying tax liability in dispute is irrelevant. Therefore, because the total unpaid tax in this case exceeded $50,000 as of the date of the IRS notice of determination, the case does not qualify to be conducted under the small tax case procedures.
FERC Response to NY AG Schneiderman's Petition to Revoke Constitution Pipelin...Marcellus Drilling News
Response from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's petition that FERC investigate and remove its approval of the Constitution Pipeline based on false allegations that the project prematurely cut down trees and engaged in construction activities for the pipeline.
This document is a petition in support of a writ of habeas corpus seeking a reduction in bail for Anna Gristina. It summarizes that Gristina was arrested and charged with a single count of promoting prostitution in the third degree, a class D non-violent felony, and bail was set at $2 million bond or $1 million cash. It argues the bail is excessive given Gristina has no criminal record, strong community ties, and faces a non-custodial sentence if convicted. It requests the court grant the writ and set reasonable bail.
Sample notice of removal to United States District CourtLegalDocsPro
This sample notice of removal to United States District Court is used to remove a case filed in a State Court to United States District Court and is filed pursuant to Title 28 U.S. Code section 1446 on the grounds that the complaint involves a federal question as stated in Title 28 U.S. Code section 1441(a) but can be easily modified for use in cases with diversity jurisdiction as well. The sample on which this preview is based is 7 pages and includes brief instructions, citations to the statutory authority, a notice to adverse party of removal to Federal Court as well as a certificate of service of notice to adverse party of removal to Federal Court. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995.
The document discusses strategies and procedures for removing a case from state to federal court, including:
- Cases that can be removed include those involving diversity of citizenship, federal questions, and certain civil rights cases.
- Defendants must file a notice of removal within 30 days of receiving the state court filing and establish federal jurisdiction.
- The notice of removal can be amended within 30 days to correct deficiencies but not assert new grounds for removal.
- Cases arising from state workers' compensation laws cannot be removed to federal court.
This document is a stipulation and order modifying a previous judgment in a divorce case between Gary W. XXXXXX and Barbara K. XXXXXX. It stipulates that (1) Barbara will receive $84,659 from Gary's 401(k) plan, ownership of their Florida condo, funds from rental and personal bank accounts, and levies against Gary's accounts; (2) these transfers settle all child and spousal support claims; (3) the 401(k) transfer is non-taxable; (4) Gary's additional child and spousal support obligations are deemed satisfied; and (5) enforcement actions against Gary will be terminated upon execution of this order.
This summary provides the essential information from the tax court document in 3 sentences:
The tax court ruled on several issues related to the petitioner's (Christopher Garrin) taxes for 2004 and 2005. The court found that Garrin failed to report $88,389 in income for 2004 based on an analysis of his bank deposits. The court also determined that Garrin was not entitled to deductions claimed on his Schedule C forms or for net operating losses beyond what the IRS had already allowed.
UNITED STATES' ABUSE OF THE 'SERIAL LITIGATOR' DEFENSEVogelDenise
17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
This document has been prepared in support of DEPRIVATION OF JURY TRIAL(S) - i.e. as “For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury” – as set forth in the United States of America’s DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. Furthermore, provides a copy of a Court Order FALSELY accusing Newsome of RACIAL and ANTI-SEMITIC SLURS for addressing for what are KNOWN to be Terrorist Acts, War Crimes, Apartheid Practices/Crimes Against Humanity, and other Criminal Acts launched against her by the United States of America’s NAZI’S and/or WHITE Jews/Zionists/Supremacists!
IMPORTANT TO NOTE: Are those WHO played ROLES in the FOUNDING of Israel as the Nazis and/or WHITE Jewish/Zionists/Supremacists Law Firms as Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz: https://www.slideshare.net/VogelDenise/baker-donelson-founder-of-state-of-israel
The DENIAL of JURY TRIAL is also a defense that may be used in seeking INTERNATIONAL Judicial Review, INVESTIGATIONS and PROSECUTIONS, etc. – i.e. in taking matter(s) before INTERNATIONAL Tribunals!
This document is a judgment of divorce that:
1. Dissolves the marriage between the plaintiff and defendant due to irretrievable breakdown of the relationship.
2. Awards sole custody of the minor children to either the plaintiff or defendant, and establishes a visitation schedule.
3. Requires one party to pay child support and/or maintenance to the other party, including provisions for health insurance and unreimbursed medical expenses.
A SYNOPSIS OF THE REGISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS IN NIGERIANnagozie Azih
The registration and enforcement of foreign judgments in Nigeria is governed by two statutes - the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Ordinance 1922 and the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1961. The 1922 Ordinance applies to judgments from UK and other Commonwealth countries, while the 1961 Act applies to other foreign countries if an order is made by the Minister of Justice. However, the 1961 Act has not been brought into effect through a Ministerial Order to date. As such, only judgments from countries covered by the 1922 Ordinance can currently be registered and enforced in Nigeria. The requirements and process for registering foreign judgments are outlined in the two statutes.
Sample motion for new trial in united states bankruptcy courtLegalDocsPro
This sample motion for new trial in United States Bankruptcy Court is filed under the provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9023 on several grounds including that (1) the verdict is against the weight of the evidence; (2) newly discovered evidence; (3) prejudicial conduct by the court or opposing counsel, and (4) juror misconduct. The sample on which this preview is based is 16 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal that has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. Note that the author is NOT an attorney and no guarantee or warranty is provided.
This summary provides the essential information from the document in 3 sentences:
This document is a summary opinion from the United States Tax Court regarding whether William Pearce is entitled to relief from joint and several tax liability for tax year 2004. The tax return for 2004 claimed a deduction for state and local income taxes that was not allowed, resulting in an underpayment. Pearce is not eligible for relief under section 6015(b), (c), or (f) because the improper deduction was attributable to his income and he signed declarations stating he reviewed the return.
The decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. EQT had leased land from Alex Cooper, et al with an initial five-year term. The lease provided for a five-year extension. It also required EQT to drill at least one well on/under the property during the first five-year lease. EQT failed to drill a well in the first term but instead elected to extend the lease for an additional five years. The federal judge found that EQT has the right to extend the lease even if they didn't drill a well during the first term.
1) Plaintiff Global Merchant filed a complaint and application for pre-arbitral attachment and stay of proceedings pending arbitration against Defendant Agri Feed for breach of contract and fraud related to the sale and delivery of hay.
2) The contract between the parties contained an arbitration clause requiring the use of CIETAC for dispute resolution. It is alleged that Defendant Agri Feed forged laboratory test results to receive payment under the letter of credit for substandard hay.
3) Plaintiff argues that California law allows for pre-arbitral attachment to prevent assets from being hidden or dissipated during arbitration proceedings. The remaining issue is whether CIETAC rules providing temporary relief would supersede California law.
Request for Entry of Default Judgment in favor for Angela KaaihueAngela Kaaihue
This document is a request for entry of default from Angela Sue Kaaihue and Yong Nam Fryer, who are pro se defendants and counter-claim plaintiffs, against Newtown Estates Community Association. It includes affidavits from Kaaihue and Fryer stating that the association failed to respond to their counter-claim within the required time period. It requests a default judgment of $43,450,000 including principal of $40 million, interest, costs and attorney's fees. Exhibits of the filed counter-claim and proofs of service are attached in support of the request.
FERC Order Denying Rehearing Requested by NY AG Schneiderman re Constitution ...Marcellus Drilling News
New York Attorney General Eric Scheiderman requested the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rehear and investigate the matter of tree clearing in NY along the proposed path of the Constitution Pipeline (still not built). Schneiderman alleged the Constitution should have prevented landowners from clearing trees on their own property ahead of the pipeline's approval by Lord Cuomo. FERC told Schneiderman to get lost--no rehearing of the matter.
This order from a district court concerns a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment that has been filed in a civil case. As one of the defendants is representing himself without an attorney, the court directs the clerk to send him materials to explain summary judgment procedure and relevant extracts from Rules 12 and 56. The defendants have 34 days to respond to the motion. The order also provides guidance on the requirements for affidavits submitted in opposition to summary judgment.
This document appears to be a record of legal filings and judgments in a court case between Sulphur Mountain Land and Livestock Co LLC and several other parties including John Redmond, Maureen Redmond, Geraldine Redmond, and Somerset Farms LLC. It includes filings such as proofs of service, judgments, appeals, motions, and other legal documents spanning from 2005 to 2015 regarding a renewal of judgment, claims of exemption, examinations of judgment debtors, transcripts for appeal, and more. The document provides a chronological record of legal proceedings and filings for this case over a ten year period.
US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - Pollock v Energy Corporation of A...Marcellus Drilling News
On Monday, October 24, 2016, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals found that ECA did not meet its burden of proving its need for a new trial in the case involving a $1.1 million judgment to landowners. The landowners sued ECA in federal court in 2010, alleging they did not receive their proper amount of royalties under their leases because allegedly improper post-production costs were deducted. The District Court jury awarded $1.1 million in damages. ECA appealed the verdict to the Third Circuit.
An Ohio landowner whose land Sunoco Logistics Partners wants to traverse with the Mariner East 2 pipeline tried a novel legal argument. The landowner's attorneys argued in the Ohio Seventh District Court of Appeals that pure propane and pure butane--both of which would be transported through the pipeline from eastern Ohio all the way to the Marcus Hook refinery near Philadelphia--are not "petroleum." At least, not petroleum for the purposes of the permit which grants Sunoco the right to build the pipeline to transport petroleum products. The Court of Appeals justices rejected that argument and said, in essence, that propane and butane fit under the definition of petroleum as that word has been used for generations. This is the court's ruling.
This document is a summary of a United States Tax Court case regarding whether a collection case qualifies for small tax case procedures. The Tax Court held that for a case to qualify under section 7463(f)(2), the total unpaid tax as of the date of the IRS notice of determination cannot exceed $50,000. The amount of the underlying tax liability in dispute is irrelevant. Therefore, because the total unpaid tax in this case exceeded $50,000 as of the date of the IRS notice of determination, the case does not qualify to be conducted under the small tax case procedures.
FERC Response to NY AG Schneiderman's Petition to Revoke Constitution Pipelin...Marcellus Drilling News
Response from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's petition that FERC investigate and remove its approval of the Constitution Pipeline based on false allegations that the project prematurely cut down trees and engaged in construction activities for the pipeline.
This document is a petition in support of a writ of habeas corpus seeking a reduction in bail for Anna Gristina. It summarizes that Gristina was arrested and charged with a single count of promoting prostitution in the third degree, a class D non-violent felony, and bail was set at $2 million bond or $1 million cash. It argues the bail is excessive given Gristina has no criminal record, strong community ties, and faces a non-custodial sentence if convicted. It requests the court grant the writ and set reasonable bail.
Sample notice of removal to United States District CourtLegalDocsPro
This sample notice of removal to United States District Court is used to remove a case filed in a State Court to United States District Court and is filed pursuant to Title 28 U.S. Code section 1446 on the grounds that the complaint involves a federal question as stated in Title 28 U.S. Code section 1441(a) but can be easily modified for use in cases with diversity jurisdiction as well. The sample on which this preview is based is 7 pages and includes brief instructions, citations to the statutory authority, a notice to adverse party of removal to Federal Court as well as a certificate of service of notice to adverse party of removal to Federal Court. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995.
The document discusses strategies and procedures for removing a case from state to federal court, including:
- Cases that can be removed include those involving diversity of citizenship, federal questions, and certain civil rights cases.
- Defendants must file a notice of removal within 30 days of receiving the state court filing and establish federal jurisdiction.
- The notice of removal can be amended within 30 days to correct deficiencies but not assert new grounds for removal.
- Cases arising from state workers' compensation laws cannot be removed to federal court.
This document is a stipulation and order modifying a previous judgment in a divorce case between Gary W. XXXXXX and Barbara K. XXXXXX. It stipulates that (1) Barbara will receive $84,659 from Gary's 401(k) plan, ownership of their Florida condo, funds from rental and personal bank accounts, and levies against Gary's accounts; (2) these transfers settle all child and spousal support claims; (3) the 401(k) transfer is non-taxable; (4) Gary's additional child and spousal support obligations are deemed satisfied; and (5) enforcement actions against Gary will be terminated upon execution of this order.
This summary provides the essential information from the tax court document in 3 sentences:
The tax court ruled on several issues related to the petitioner's (Christopher Garrin) taxes for 2004 and 2005. The court found that Garrin failed to report $88,389 in income for 2004 based on an analysis of his bank deposits. The court also determined that Garrin was not entitled to deductions claimed on his Schedule C forms or for net operating losses beyond what the IRS had already allowed.
UNITED STATES' ABUSE OF THE 'SERIAL LITIGATOR' DEFENSEVogelDenise
17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
This document has been prepared in support of DEPRIVATION OF JURY TRIAL(S) - i.e. as “For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury” – as set forth in the United States of America’s DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. Furthermore, provides a copy of a Court Order FALSELY accusing Newsome of RACIAL and ANTI-SEMITIC SLURS for addressing for what are KNOWN to be Terrorist Acts, War Crimes, Apartheid Practices/Crimes Against Humanity, and other Criminal Acts launched against her by the United States of America’s NAZI’S and/or WHITE Jews/Zionists/Supremacists!
IMPORTANT TO NOTE: Are those WHO played ROLES in the FOUNDING of Israel as the Nazis and/or WHITE Jewish/Zionists/Supremacists Law Firms as Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz: https://www.slideshare.net/VogelDenise/baker-donelson-founder-of-state-of-israel
The DENIAL of JURY TRIAL is also a defense that may be used in seeking INTERNATIONAL Judicial Review, INVESTIGATIONS and PROSECUTIONS, etc. – i.e. in taking matter(s) before INTERNATIONAL Tribunals!
This document is a judgment of divorce that:
1. Dissolves the marriage between the plaintiff and defendant due to irretrievable breakdown of the relationship.
2. Awards sole custody of the minor children to either the plaintiff or defendant, and establishes a visitation schedule.
3. Requires one party to pay child support and/or maintenance to the other party, including provisions for health insurance and unreimbursed medical expenses.
A SYNOPSIS OF THE REGISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS IN NIGERIANnagozie Azih
The registration and enforcement of foreign judgments in Nigeria is governed by two statutes - the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Ordinance 1922 and the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1961. The 1922 Ordinance applies to judgments from UK and other Commonwealth countries, while the 1961 Act applies to other foreign countries if an order is made by the Minister of Justice. However, the 1961 Act has not been brought into effect through a Ministerial Order to date. As such, only judgments from countries covered by the 1922 Ordinance can currently be registered and enforced in Nigeria. The requirements and process for registering foreign judgments are outlined in the two statutes.
Sample motion for new trial in united states bankruptcy courtLegalDocsPro
This sample motion for new trial in United States Bankruptcy Court is filed under the provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9023 on several grounds including that (1) the verdict is against the weight of the evidence; (2) newly discovered evidence; (3) prejudicial conduct by the court or opposing counsel, and (4) juror misconduct. The sample on which this preview is based is 16 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal that has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. Note that the author is NOT an attorney and no guarantee or warranty is provided.
This summary provides the essential information from the document in 3 sentences:
This document is a summary opinion from the United States Tax Court regarding whether William Pearce is entitled to relief from joint and several tax liability for tax year 2004. The tax return for 2004 claimed a deduction for state and local income taxes that was not allowed, resulting in an underpayment. Pearce is not eligible for relief under section 6015(b), (c), or (f) because the improper deduction was attributable to his income and he signed declarations stating he reviewed the return.
The decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. EQT had leased land from Alex Cooper, et al with an initial five-year term. The lease provided for a five-year extension. It also required EQT to drill at least one well on/under the property during the first five-year lease. EQT failed to drill a well in the first term but instead elected to extend the lease for an additional five years. The federal judge found that EQT has the right to extend the lease even if they didn't drill a well during the first term.
1) Plaintiff Global Merchant filed a complaint and application for pre-arbitral attachment and stay of proceedings pending arbitration against Defendant Agri Feed for breach of contract and fraud related to the sale and delivery of hay.
2) The contract between the parties contained an arbitration clause requiring the use of CIETAC for dispute resolution. It is alleged that Defendant Agri Feed forged laboratory test results to receive payment under the letter of credit for substandard hay.
3) Plaintiff argues that California law allows for pre-arbitral attachment to prevent assets from being hidden or dissipated during arbitration proceedings. The remaining issue is whether CIETAC rules providing temporary relief would supersede California law.
Motion Filed in US District Court of Eastern OH Against Texas Eastern Eminent...Marcellus Drilling News
This memorandum opposes the plaintiff's motion for immediate possession of the defendants' property on the grounds that:
1) The Ohio Constitution prohibits "quick-take" eminent domain proceedings for non-road projects unless compensation is determined by a jury first.
2) Neither the Natural Gas Act nor federal eminent domain rules preempt the Ohio Constitution's limitations, as they do not conflict or make compliance with both impossible.
3) As such, the plaintiff cannot take immediate possession of the property without a prior jury determination of compensation, as required by the Ohio Constitution.
This case involves a dispute over entitlement to a partial refund of a special assessment paid into a fund to repair defects in a condominium building. The previous owners, who paid the special assessment, sold the property to the current owners. After the repairs were completed, there was a refund remaining in the fund. Both the previous and current owners claimed entitlement to the refund. The court found that the sale contract between the parties implicitly allocated the risk of any refund or future assessment to the purchasers. As such, the court ruled that the current owners were entitled to the refund as there was a valid contract between the parties providing a juristic reason for the enrichment.
This document provides notice of Patriot Coal Corporation's motion seeking court approval to conduct rights offerings as part of its chapter 11 reorganization plan. Specifically, the motion seeks authorization to enter into a backstop purchase agreement with certain funds to ensure sufficient proceeds are raised in the rights offerings. The rights offerings will allow eligible creditors to purchase new senior secured notes and warrants. The motion also seeks approval of the proposed rights offerings procedures. Objections to the motion are due by October 30, with a hearing scheduled for November 6.
Trial Strategy: Using "Other Paper" in a Motion to Remand a Coverage Action t...NationalUnderwriter
A recent decision by a federal district court in Pennsylvania highlights the importance of understanding the phrase “other paper” – for both insurance companies and policyholders – to decide the timeliness of a notice of removal.
The Impact of the PSLRA on Post-Discovery Amendment of PleadingsWendy Couture
This document summarizes the impact of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) on amending pleadings after discovery in securities fraud cases. It discusses how the PSLRA requires heightened pleading standards and stays discovery during motions to dismiss. After a claim survives dismissal, courts take different approaches to post-discovery amendment. Some invite amendment if discovery reveals new evidence, while others view amendment as circumventing the PSLRA's pleading requirements. The document analyzes relevant Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and case law on this issue. It concludes by noting an upcoming Ninth Circuit case that could provide guidance on the interaction between the PSLRA and post-discovery amendment.
Pennsylvania OOR Appeal 1-2023 - Final Determination Ax318960
FOIA and RTKL regulations allow for agency provision of records which are in no way responsive to the requests being made. Said allowance enables agencies to circumvent proper process and protocol and negates the transparency that these laws were created to achieve.
The document summarizes New Jersey statutes and court rules related to landlord-tenant law and eviction proceedings. It discusses when a landlord can file to transfer an eviction case from a Special Civil Part court to a Law Division court, rebuttable presumptions against landlord retaliation, and grounds for a tenant to obtain a judgment if an eviction is filed for retaliatory reasons. It also covers stays of eviction warrants and when a court must issue a warrant for possession. The document provides an overview of New Jersey laws governing landlord-tenant disputes and eviction cases.
This document is a court opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit regarding a dispute over the expansion of the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport. The Federal Aviation Administration approved Broward County's plan to extend a runway and close another, over objections that an alternative plan would be preferable environmentally. The opinion finds that the FAA approval is a final order, the petitioners have standing, and that the FAA did not act arbitrarily or in violation of relevant statutes in approving the county's plan rather than the alternative.
The Court of Appeals of North Carolina held that the federal Animal Welfare Act does not preempt a claim brought under North Carolina law alleging animal cruelty at a zoo. The federal law does not expressly preempt state law, implies no intent to exclusively regulate animal welfare nationwide, and does not conflict with the state law. Therefore, the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiffs' claims and its dismissal was reversed and remanded.
The Court of Appeals of North Carolina held that the federal Animal Welfare Act does not preempt a claim brought under North Carolina law alleging animal cruelty at a zoo. The federal law does not expressly preempt state law, implies no intent to exclusively regulate animal welfare nationwide, and does not conflict with the state law. Therefore, the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiffs' claims and its dismissal was reversed and remanded.
This document is a memorandum opinion from a US District Court case between I/P Engine, Inc. and various defendants including AOL, Google, and others. The court is determining an ongoing royalty rate for the defendants' continued infringement of I/P Engine's patents related to online advertising systems. The court considers the 3.5% running royalty rate from the previous jury verdict as a starting point. After analyzing additional factors related to the defendants now being adjudged infringers, the court sets the ongoing royalty rate at 6.5%, consisting of a 4.6% base rate plus a 1.9% enhancement for willful infringement.
A court case in which a landowner in Ohio sued to cancel a lease because the driller and the company that owns the lease have not paid any royalties since drilling. The Fifth Appellate District Court of Ohio found that because a specific provision in the original lease does not provide for cancellation due to non-payment of royalties, the landowners will have to continue to get screwed.
The document summarizes several recent changes to Colorado law:
1) New rules for calculating filing deadlines take effect in 2012 and practitioners should check for updates. 2) The Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act of 2011 changes federal removal and venue rules. 3) The Colorado Supreme Court adopted a new public domain citation format for its opinions to make them more accessible.
Motion to Intervene in ET Rover Pipeline Application for Eminent Domain befor...Marcellus Drilling News
A motion by Columbus, OH law firm Goldman & Braunstein to prevent ET Rover from obtaining eminent domain to install the ET Rover pipeline without first negotiating with individual landowners. Eminent domain takes all of the bargaining power away from landowners. This motion attempts to remedy that.
Defense Response to Government Motion to Reconsider 2 October 2014 - al Iraqi...Thomas (Tom) Jasper
This Motion is timely filed pursuant to Rule for Military Commission (R.M.C.) 905(b) and Military Commissions Trial Judiciary Rule of Court (R. C.) 3.7.
The defense requests the Military Judge deny the Government's motion to reconsider, or in the alternative, deny the requested relief as unnecessary.
1. Judgment Creditors KPC filed a motion to appoint a receiver to enforce a $2.1 million judgment against Judgment Debtor Stephen Gaggero and his alter ego entities.
2. Gaggero has avoided paying the judgment by transferring his assets to various entities, trusts, and a foundation through an asset protection plan, even though he retains control over the assets.
3. KPC argues that the court has authority to appoint a receiver under the Code of Civil Procedure to enforce the judgment and that a receiver is necessary because Gaggero and his counsel have obstructed and delayed KPC's collection efforts for years.
The Tribunal was seized with requests from both parties regarding interim measures and jurisdiction. Regarding interim measures, the Tribunal ordered an expert to commence inventorying goods stored by Claimant and transferred some goods to a more suitable warehouse. The Tribunal also ordered Respondents to deposit additional funds to cover expert costs. However, the Tribunal declined to fully grant Respondents' request to transfer all goods, reserving final jurisdiction determination. The Tribunal invited both parties to submit evidence on jurisdiction by a set deadline.
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive function. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms.
Carolyn Elefant, an attorney who owns a boutique energy law practice and freelance legal marketplace, writes to request that the Maryland State Bar Association rescind its 1992 ethics opinion prohibiting lawyers from marking up the costs of freelance attorneys. The opinion is outdated as the legal profession has embraced freelance arrangements and the gig economy. Allowing markups benefits clients through lower overall rates, solo and small firm lawyers by incentivizing the use of lower-cost freelancers, and freelance attorneys by providing them work opportunities. Most other ethics authorities, including the ABA, permit reasonable markups. Rescinding the opinion would bring Maryland in line with the modern legal industry while supporting cost-effective and flexible legal services.
Faster, Better, Cheaper: Achieving the Trifecta With TechnologyCarolyn Elefant
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive function. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms for those who already suffer from conditions like anxiety and depression.
Risks for Lawyers of NOT Using Technology & Digital Media to Connect With Cli...Carolyn Elefant
This document discusses whether clients, coworkers, or colleagues should be friended on Facebook. It notes there are two schools of thought on this, with no clear right answer. On one hand, friending could allow supporting clients' causes and showing accessibility, but clients may see non-work details and overshare. Instagram can be used as a recruiting and branding tool where Facebook risks too much personal information being shared. The document also discusses whether lawyers can participate in sites charging clients and taking a percentage of legal fees, noting ethics rules in New York prohibit this as an improper fee split, while others see it as a modern way of doing business.
Slidedeck from the March 22, 2016, presentation on FERC and Pipeline Overbuild at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) Energy Finance Training Program held at Columbia Law School.
This document summarizes the agenda and key topics for the Clio Cloud Conference 2014 held in Chicago, Illinois from September 22-23, 2014. The conference focused on how technology has transformed and disrupted the legal profession, moving practices to the cloud and lowering costs. Specific sessions examined how solo and small law firms can become more sustainable and profitable through structural changes like subscription services, diversifying services, and changing outdated ethics rules around client trust accounts and advertising.
This document discusses the importance of systems and technology tools for law offices to manage time and workload effectively. It notes that over 16% of malpractice claims in 2008 resulted from firms not properly managing deadlines and calendars. Systems can help avoid mistakes, facilitate delegation, and prevent client surprises. The document provides examples of different types of systems, such as checklists, templates, collaborative tools, and knowledge management tools. It also offers tips for setting up systems, such as defining the purpose and intended users. An example client intake process is outlined in a table as well. Overall, the document advocates that systems can help lawyers and firms get more work done with less stress.
Social Media For Utilities: Law and PracticesCarolyn Elefant
This document discusses social media use in the utility industry and the legal and regulatory considerations. It begins by explaining why social media presents both opportunities and risks for regulated industries. It then provides an overview of how utilities are currently using social media platforms like LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. The document outlines five sources of authority that govern social media use in regulated industries: law, regulatory codes of conduct, platform terms of service, social media policies, and best practices/netiquette. It then discusses specific legal and regulatory trends utilities should be aware of regarding issues like employment, advertising, privacy, and more. The key takeaways are to be transparent, differentiate personal from professional use, ensure policies apply to vendors, and
Order No. 1000 and Beyond: Transmission Policy, Renewables and MoreCarolyn Elefant
Order No. 1000 requires regional transmission planning to consider public policy needs like renewable energy. It was challenged for encroaching on state authority but recent rulings found flexibility. Other FERC orders incentivize transmission for renewables and demand response as alternatives. States largely control net metering and small generator interconnection, which are key for distributed renewable energy. While Order No. 1000 is significant, states have multiple tools to achieve renewable goals within their jurisdiction.
This document discusses the legal risks associated with using social media in regulated industries like food. It notes that user-generated content on third party platforms reduces a company's control. It outlines the main social media platforms and five sources of authority - law, regulatory codes, platform terms of service, social media policies, and netiquette - that govern social media use. Key legal trends around employment, copyright, advertising, and e-discovery are also summarized. The document stresses the importance of transparency, authenticity, and respect on social media and keeping policies and risk management strategies up to date.
Free Stuff for Going Solo; an excerpt from Launching a 21st Century Law PracticeCarolyn Elefant
This document lists and evaluates free and low-cost tools that solo practitioners can use to run their law practices. It provides a table comparing options for business planning, word processing, legal research, timekeeping, invoicing, payments, appointments, scheduling, document storage, forms, web development, blogging, client portals, email, fax, voicemail, e-signing, conference calls, web platforms, event registration, online presence, invitations, photos, and newsletters. Many effective free solutions are available for tasks like word processing, research, payments, scheduling, storage, and online communication. Low-cost paid options may be preferable for features like client portals and practice management systems.
The document provides tips and best practices for lawyers to use social media platforms like LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter for business purposes. It recommends setting goals for social media use, matching platforms to goals, creating robust profiles, balancing personal and professional content, being consistent in posting, and leveraging mobile devices. Specific advice is given for using features and growing connections on each individual platform.
The document provides 10 tips for creating an effective 21st century retainer agreement. It emphasizes making the agreement brief, focused on key elements like scope of work and fees, and using clear language and formatting. Additional tips include allowing for evolving modern practices, using graphics and readable design, deciding what information to include or exclude, adding a signature block, and ensuring the agreement is easily readable. The document highlights challenges today's clients and law practices present and resources for improving agreement design.
OREC Webinar: From Silicon Valley to Wall Street to Foggy Bottom:Carolyn Elefant
In this program, Carolyn Elefant, owner of the Law Offices of Carolyn Elefant, counsel to the Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition (OREC), seasoned FERC practitioner and legal advisor to innovative law and technology companies identifies and discusses the regulatory market pull incentives developed by FERC over the past 2 years that are creating robust green technology markets and enormous opportunities for entrepreneurs and investors.
Six Start-Up Technology Trends That Start Up Lawyers Can UseCarolyn Elefant
This document discusses 6 technology trends for lawyers: 1) Search is being replaced by discovery through sites like Pinterest where users share interests; 2) Specialized mobile apps are appealing for niche practices; 3) Lawyers can affiliate with others through integration and cross-promotion; 4) Freemium models using free initial services can create new paying clients; 5) Start-ups disrupt by addressing areas larger firms ignore; and 6) Social media like Instagram fosters connection by its nostalgic elements. The trends highlight opportunities for solos and small firms to better connect with clients through tailored digital strategies.
Legal Issues Re: Social Media for the Regulated Utility IndustryCarolyn Elefant
This document discusses social media use for regulated utility industries. It provides an overview of common social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter and some of the key legal issues utilities should consider when using social media, such as rate recovery, privacy, record keeping, and ex parte communications. The document recommends that regulators develop social media policies through guidance and best practices rather than platform-specific regulations, and emphasizes the importance of utilities and their legal teams actively using social media to effectively develop social media policies.
Know Your Rights When A FERC Pipeline Comes to Your CommunityCarolyn Elefant
Most landowners and communities do not realize that they can participate in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) process regarding certificates for natural gas pipelines. If you know and understand the rules, you can have your voice heard. This presentation explains how.
The document summarizes a presentation on the ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 and its review of advances in technology and legal practice. The Commission has issued papers on lawyers' use of internet-based marketing tools and client confidentiality issues related to technology use. The presentation criticizes some of the Commission's initial proposals as overregulating lawyers' use of tools like social media and cloud computing. It argues rules should focus on preventing deception, not restricting technology use, and that best practices combined with vendor certification may be preferable to additional rules. Uniformity of standards is also emphasized as important for multi-jurisdictional practice.
This document briefly explains the June compliance calendar 2024 with income tax returns, PF, ESI, and important due dates, forms to be filled out, periods, and who should file them?.
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...Sangyun Lee
Presentation slides for a session held on June 4, 2024, at Kyoto University. This presentation is based on the presenter’s recent paper, coauthored with Hwang Lee, Professor, Korea University, with the same title, published in the Journal of Business Administration & Law, Volume 34, No. 2 (April 2024). The paper, written in Korean, is available at <https://shorturl.at/GCWcI>.
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...lawyersonia
The legal profession, which has historically been male-dominated, has experienced a significant increase in the number of women entering the field over the past few decades. Despite this progress, women lawyers continue to encounter various challenges as they strive for top positions.
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptxMasoudZamani13
Excited to share insights from my recent presentation on genocide! 💡 In light of ongoing debates, it's crucial to delve into the nuances of this grave crime.
Synopsis On Annual General Meeting/Extra Ordinary General Meeting With Ordinary And Special Businesses And Ordinary And Special Resolutions with Companies (Postal Ballot) Regulations, 2018
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentationseri bangash
"Lifting the Corporate Veil" is a legal concept that refers to the judicial act of disregarding the separate legal personality of a corporation or limited liability company (LLC). Normally, a corporation is considered a legal entity separate from its shareholders or members, meaning that the personal assets of shareholders or members are protected from the liabilities of the corporation. However, there are certain situations where courts may decide to "pierce" or "lift" the corporate veil, holding shareholders or members personally liable for the debts or actions of the corporation.
Here are some common scenarios in which courts might lift the corporate veil:
Fraud or Illegality: If shareholders or members use the corporate structure to perpetrate fraud, evade legal obligations, or engage in illegal activities, courts may disregard the corporate entity and hold those individuals personally liable.
Undercapitalization: If a corporation is formed with insufficient capital to conduct its intended business and meet its foreseeable liabilities, and this lack of capitalization results in harm to creditors or other parties, courts may lift the corporate veil to hold shareholders or members liable.
Failure to Observe Corporate Formalities: Corporations and LLCs are required to observe certain formalities, such as holding regular meetings, maintaining separate financial records, and avoiding commingling of personal and corporate assets. If these formalities are not observed and the corporate structure is used as a mere façade, courts may disregard the corporate entity.
Alter Ego: If there is such a unity of interest and ownership between the corporation and its shareholders or members that the separate personalities of the corporation and the individuals no longer exist, courts may treat the corporation as the alter ego of its owners and hold them personally liable.
Group Enterprises: In some cases, where multiple corporations are closely related or form part of a single economic unit, courts may pierce the corporate veil to achieve equity, particularly if one corporation's actions harm creditors or other stakeholders and the corporate structure is being used to shield culpable parties from liability.
Guide on the use of Artificial Intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law fi...Massimo Talia
This guide aims to provide information on how lawyers will be able to use the opportunities provided by AI tools and how such tools could help the business processes of small firms. Its objective is to provide lawyers with some background to understand what they can and cannot realistically expect from these products. This guide aims to give a reference point for small law practices in the EU
against which they can evaluate those classes of AI applications that are probably the most relevant for them.
Matthew Professional CV experienced Government LiaisonMattGardner52
As an experienced Government Liaison, I have demonstrated expertise in Corporate Governance. My skill set includes senior-level management in Contract Management, Legal Support, and Diplomatic Relations. I have also gained proficiency as a Corporate Liaison, utilizing my strong background in accounting, finance, and legal, with a Bachelor's degree (B.A.) from California State University. My Administrative Skills further strengthen my ability to contribute to the growth and success of any organization.
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence LawyersHarpreetSaini48
Discover how Mississauga criminal defence lawyers defend clients facing weapon offence charges with expert legal guidance and courtroom representation.
To know more visit: https://www.saini-law.com/
1. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
EASTERN DIVISION
No. 4:18-CV-36-BO
ATLANTIC COAST PIPELINE, LLC,
Plaintiff,
V.
0.47 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, IN HALIFAX
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on a motion by the defendant landowners in this action
seeking attorneys' fees and costs. Plaintiff has responded in opposition and has filed a motion
seeking leave to serve limited discovery. The appropriate responses and replies have been filed
and the matters are ripe for ruling.
BACKGROUND
On September 18, 2015, plaintiff, Atlantic Coast Pipeline or ACP, filed an application for
a certificate ofpublic convenience and necessity with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC), seeking permission to construct an approximately 600-mile pipeline and related facilities
for the purpose of transporting natural gas from West Virginia to Virginia and North Carolina.
FERC issued ACP a certificate of public convenience and necessity on October 13, 2017,
authorizing ACP to construct the pipeline. See [DE 1-2]. In order to construct the pipeline, ACP
needed to acquire both temporary and permanent, exclusive easements on properties, including the
subject property, along the FERC-approved pipeline route.
To that end, ACP filed in this Court a total of seventy-seven complaints in condemnation
pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 717f(h) and Federal Rule ofCivil Procedure 71.1. In each complaint, ACP
sought an order allowing the taking of certain interests in real property, immediate entry and
Case 4:18-cv-00036-BO Document 74 Filed 12/18/20 Page 1 of 8
2. possession of real property, and the ascertainment and award ofjust compensation to the owners
of interest in the subject real property pursuant to its power of eminent domain as authorized by
Section 7(h) of the National Gas Act.
Partial summary judgment was entered in ACP's favor in some cases, many cases settled,
and several cases were stayed for a period pending other litigation. On July 5, 2020, ACP
announced the cancelation of its pipeline project. In the above captioned case, ACP filed a notice
ofvoluntary dismissal on July 9, 2020, pursuant to Rule 71. l(i)(l)(A) ofthe Federal Rules ofCivil
Procedure. The voluntary dismissal was filed prior to ACP acquiring any title or lesser interest in
the subject property and prior to any hearing on compensation.
Following ACP's dismissal, counsel for the land-owner defendants filed a request that the
Court retain jurisdiction. The Court allowed that motion in part and permitted the landowner
defendants to file motions seeking to recover costs and fees or other ancillary relief on July 10,
2019. The instant motions followed.
DISCUSSION
In condemnation cases, the general rule is that litigation expenses are nonrecoverable, but
Congress created a narrow exception to that rule when it enacted the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (the Relocation Act). United States v.
410.69 Acres ofLand, More or Less in Escambia Cty., State ofFla. , 608 F.2d 1073, 1076 (5th Cir.
1979). The Relocation Act was enacted to "establish[] a uniform policy for the fair and equitable
treatment of persons displaces as a direct result of programs or projects undertaken by a federal
agency." 42 U.S.C. § 4621(d). As applies specifically to litigation expenses in condemnation
proceedings, the Relocation Act provides that
The Federal court having jurisdiction ofa proceeding instituted by a Federal agency
to acquire real property by condemnation shall award the owner ofany right, or title
2
Case 4:18-cv-00036-BO Document 74 Filed 12/18/20 Page 2 of 8
3. to, or interest in, such real property such sum as will in the opinion of the court
reimburse such owner for his reasonable costs, disbursements, and expenses,
including reasonable attorney, appraisal, and engineering fees, actually incurred
because of the condemnation proceedings, if--
(1) the final judgment is that the Federal agency cannot acquire the real property by
condemnation; or
(2) the proceeding is abandoned by the United States.
42 U.S.C. § 4654(a).
A federal agency is defined by the Relocation Act to include "any person who has the
authority to acquire property by eminent domain under Federal Law." 42 U.S.C. § 4601 . ACP does
not dispute that it is a federal agency for purposes of§ 4654(a) because it was granted authority to
acquire property by eminent domain under federal law pursuant to its FERC Certificate and the
Natural Gas Act. Nor does ACP argue that the defendants are not the proper landowners or that
the proceeding has not been abandoned. Rather, ACP argues that it is not required to pay attorney
fees and expenses to the defendant landowners under § 4654(a)(2) because it is not the United
States. In support, ACP relies on a decision of the Ninth Circuit, in which the court held that
[g]iven our interpretation of the term [the United States], the landowner's right to
costs and fees is triggered only when the federal government abandons a
condemnation proceeding, not when a private entity such as Transwestern does so,
even if that private entity is exercising federally granted condemnation power.
Transwestern Pipeline Co., LLC v. 17. 19 Acres ofProp. Located in Maricopa Cty., 627 F.3d 1268,
1271 (9th Cir. 2010).
This Court respectfully disagrees with the Ninth Circuit's holding. "For reasons that are
unknown, the statute uses different language ascribing responsibility for fees" when judgment is
entered finding that the property cannot be acquired by condemnation versus when a proceeding
is abandoned. Transcon. Gas Pipe Line Co., LLC v. A Permanent Easementfor 0.018 Acres, No.
09-1385, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85393, at *7 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 18, 2010). The legislative history of
Section 304 of the Relocation Act, as reflected in a report by the House of Representatives'
3
Case 4:18-cv-00036-BO Document 74 Filed 12/18/20 Page 3 of 8
4. Committee on Public Works, discusses reimbursing property owners for reasonable litigation
expenses following the abandonment of condemnation proceedings instituted by federal agencies
and then abandoned by "the Government." H.R. Rep. No. 91-1656, p. 25 (1970). The Supreme
Court, when discussing this statute, has also used "Federal agency" and the "Government"
interchangeably, referring to the costs placed by the Relocation Act on "the Government," which
include reasonable attorney fees following abandonment by "the Government" of a condemnation
proceeding. United States v. Bodcaw Co. , 440 U.S. 202, 204 (1979).
This suggests that the statute's use of the terms federal agency and United States is
ambiguous, and, as identified by the Transcontinental Gas Pipeline court, "[t]here are several
reasons for applying the abandonment provision to private companies exercising federal
authority." Transcon. Gas Pipe Line 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85393, at *8; see also Griffin v.
Oceanic Contractors, Inc., 458 U.S. 564, 575 (1982) ("interpretations of a statute which would
produce absurd results are to be avoided ifalternative interpretations consistent with the legislative
purpose are available.").
The first is that in all cases involving a federal agency the Unites States is the proper party.
Id. Importantly, a private company, here ACP, has absolutely no authority to condemn property
absent express statutory authorization. After having been granted such an authorization, the private
company in essence stands in the shoes of a federal agency, or in other words, the United States
government. See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. § 717f(h). Indeed, this is reflected in the Relocation Act's
definition of a federal agency, which includes "any person who has the authority to acquire
property by eminent domain under Federal law." 42 U.S.C. § 4601.
There is further no appreciable difference from the perspective of the landowner when the
proceeding is abandoned versus when judgment is entered against the federal agency. Transcon.
4
Case 4:18-cv-00036-BO Document 74 Filed 12/18/20 Page 4 of 8
5. Gas Pipeline, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85393 *8. Finally, Section 304 of the Act, titled Litigation
expenses, applies to real property condemnation proceedings instituted by a federal agency; the
statute elsewhere does not make a distinction between a federal agency and the United States. Id.
at *9; 42 U.S.C. § 4654(a).
Other than the decision of the Ninth Circuit cited above, the cases cited by ACP are either
inapposite or fail to address the specific issue raised in this case. For example, in United States v.
410.69 Acres, 608 F. 2d 1073, while the court determined that the legislative history of the
Relocation Act supports a restrictive reading of§ 4246(a), it only concluded that such a restrictive
reading would prevent an award of litigation expenses where, following the government's
dismissal of the condemnation proceeding, the landowner sold the land to the government for his
asking price. Id. at 1076. Based upon the foregoing, the Court is persuaded that, pursuant to §
4654(a)(2),because the proceeding instituted by ACP has been abandoned, it shall award the
defendant landowners such a sum as this Court determines will reimburse the landowners for their
reasonable costs, disbursements, and expenses, to include reasonable attorney, appraisal, and
engineering fees, which have actually been incurred because of the condemnation proceeding.
Accordingly, the Court does not address the defendant landowners' argument that they are
alternatively entitled to attorney fees under North Carolina law.
Having determined that the it has a statutory duty to award reasonable litigation expenses,
the Court turns to ACP's motion to serve limited discovery regarding the motion for attorney fees
and costs. ACP contends that it should be permitted to serve four discovery requests on the
landowners which would require them to produce their fee agreement with counsel and any other
contracts or agreement with their attorneys as well as to answer interrogatories regarding whether
the landowners agree they have a legal obligation to pay their attorneys $20,008, whether they
5
Case 4:18-cv-00036-BO Document 74 Filed 12/18/20 Page 5 of 8
6. intend to pay their attorneys, whether any third party has offered to pay the landowners' legal fees,
and to provide further description of line item costs described in their motion. The landowner
defendants oppose the motion but have provided the declaration of one landowner defendant,
Normandy Blackman, in an attempt to resolve some ofthe dispute.
In order to determine whether the costs requested have been actually incurred, a court may
review a fee agreement, but it may also consider written representations of counsel. See United
States v. 243.538 Acres ofLand, More or Less, In Maui Cty. , State ofHawaii, 509 F. Supp. 981,
987 (D. Haw. 1981). Here, counsel for defendant landowners has submitted an affidavit in support
ofthe motion for attorneys' fees and costs. Moreover, in her declaration, Ms. Blackman states that
she agreed to pay for fees and expenses of her attorneys and staff at a fixed rate in addition to
paying costs, has been paying invoices sent to her for legal services rendered, and that no third-
party has agreed to pay or offered to pay for legal expenses. Blackman Deel. ,r,r 6-9. The Court
deems this sufficient to demonstrate that the requested fees and costs have been actually incurred.
The Court deems the remaining discovery requests unnecessary and unduly burdensome.
The declaration of Ms. Blackman has satisfactorily answered the first three requested
interrogatories, and the Court determines that the costs described in the "slip listing" attached as
Exhibit A to attorney Cralle Jones' affidavit are sufficiently specific. Accordingly, ACP's motion
for leave to serve limited discovery requests is denied.
Finally, the Court must determine whether the sum requested in the motion, $18,870 in
attorney fees and $1,138 in costs, is reasonable. Determination of an attorney fee award involves
three steps. McAfee v. Boczar, 738 F.3d 81, 88 (4th Cir. 2013). The Court first determines the
lodestar amount by multiplying a reasonable fee rate times the number of reasonable hours
expended. Id (citing Robinson v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, 560 F.3d 235, 243 (4th Cir.2009)).
6
Case 4:18-cv-00036-BO Document 74 Filed 12/18/20 Page 6 of 8
7. The reasonable rate as well as a reasonable number of hours expended are determined by applying
the factors set forth in Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express Inc., 488 F.2d 714, 717-19 (5th
Cir.1974). 1 Id. In the second step, the Court subtracts any fees for hours spent on unsuccessful
claims. Id. In the last step, the court awards a percentage of the remaining amount, "depending on
the degree of success enjoyed by the [party]." Id.
In order to establish a reasonable rate, defendant landowners have submitted the affidavit
ofanother local attorney who represents private property owners in eminent domain litigation. [DE
66-2]. This attorney, Charles Lolar, Sr., states that he believes the hourly rates charged by
defendant landowners' attorneys are below market rate and that attorney Lolar generally charges
$600 per hour for attorney work. ACP has not objected to the rates provided by counsel for
defendant landowners as unreasonable. Based upon the foregoing, the Court determines that the
rate of $250 per hour for attorney time and $95 per hour for legal assistant time requested by
defendant landowners is reasonable.
The number of hours expended, 121.05 hours, is reasonable given that this suit was filed
in February 2018 and has involved extensive motions practice. Counsel for defendant landowners
represented other defendant landowners in similar suits brought by ACP and was able to minimize
her duplication of efforts and limit the time expended. The number of hours spent is substantially
1
1) The Johnson factors include the "time and labor expended; (2) the novelty and difficulty of
the questions raised; (3) the skill required to properly perform the legal services rendered; (4) the
attorney's opportunity costs in pressing the instant litigation; (5) the customary fee for like work;
(6) the attorney's expectations at the outset of the litigation; (7) the time limitations imposed by
the client or circumstances; (8) the amount in controversy and the results obtained; (9) the
experience, reputation, and ability of the attorney; (10) the undesirability of the case within the
legal community in which the suit arose; (11) the nature and length ofthe professional relationship
between attorney and client; and (12) attorneys' fees awards in similar cases." McAfee, 738 F.3d
at 88 n.5.
7
Case 4:18-cv-00036-BO Document 74 Filed 12/18/20 Page 7 of 8
8. less than the number of hours estimated by attorney Lolar. ACP does not object to the number of
hours as being unreasonable. The appropriate lodestar amount is therefore $18,870.
In their answer, the defendant landowners objected to the complaint in condemnation and
raised their defenses to the taking. [DE 16]. There were no unsuccessful claims and defendant
landowners were fully successful in this case because, although judgment was not entered in their
favor and against ACP, the pipeline project was abandoned. ACP has not argued that the amount
ofthe attorney fee award should be reduced on any ground. The Court in its discretion determines
that in this case the full attorney fee award is appropriate. As discussed above, the Court determines
that costs of $1 ,138 are appropriately supported and will be awarded in this case.
In summary, defendant landowners have demonstrated that they are entitled to an award of
reasonable fees and appropriate costs under § 4654(a)(2) as against ACP. Defendant landowners
have further demonstrated that, in accordance with the statute, they are landowners who have
actually incurred reasonable fees of $18,870 and costs of $1 ,138 in a case in which the
condemnation proceeding has been abandoned.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, defendants' motion for attorney fees and costs [DE 66] is GRANTED in
accordance with the foregoing. Plaintiffs motion for leave to serve limited discovery [DE 67] is
DENIED.
SO ORDERED, this .Liday of December 2020.
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
8
Case 4:18-cv-00036-BO Document 74 Filed 12/18/20 Page 8 of 8