TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC v. PERMANENT EASEMENTS FOR 2.14 ACRES AND TEMPORARY EASEMENTS FOR 3.59 ACRES IN CONESTOGA TOWNSHIP, LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, TAX PARCEL NUMBER 1201606900000; HILLTOP HOLLOW LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; HILLTOP HOLLOW PARTNERSHIP LLC GENERAL PARTNER OF HILLTOP HOLLOW LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; LANCASTER FARMLAND TRUST; ALL UNKNOWN OWNERS, Hilltop Hollow Limited Partnership and Hilltop Hollow Partnership, LLC, Appellants in 17-3075;TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC v. PERMANENT EASEMENT FOR 2.02 ACRES AND TEMPORARY EASEMENTS FOR 2.76 ACRES IN MANOR TOWNSHIP, LANCASTER COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA, TAX PARCEL NUMBER 4100300500000, 3049 SAFE HARBOR ROAD, MANOR TOWNSHIP, LANCASTER, PA; STEPHEN D. HOFFMAN; AND ALL UNKNOWN OWNERS, Stephen D. Hoffman, Appellant in 17-3076;TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC v. PERMANENT EASEMENT FOR 1.33 ACRES AND TEMPORARY EASEMENTS FOR 2.28 ACRES CONESTOGA TOWNSHIP, LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA TAX PARCEL NUMBER 1202476100000, 4160 MAIN STREET CONESTOGA, PA 17516; LYNDA LIKE, also known as Linda Like, AND ALL UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS Lynda Like, Appellant in 17-3115;TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPELINE COMPANY, LLC v. PERMANENT EASEMENT FOR 0.94 ACRES AND TEMPORARY EASEMENTS FOR 1.61 ACRES IN CONESTOGA TOWNSHIP, LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, TAX PARCEL NUMBER 1203589400000, SICKMAN MILL ROAD; BLAIR B. MOHN; MEGAN E. MOHN, AND ALL UNKNOWN OWNERS, Blair B. Mohn and Megan E. Mohn, Appellants in 17-3116, 907 F.3d 725
Summary
HOLDINGS: [1]-Unlike in a quick take action, the gas company did not yet have title but would receive it once final compensation was determined and paid, and the landowners had the opportunity to brief the summary judgment motions and participate in the preliminary injunction hearing; [2]-As the preliminary injunction was permitted by the Rules, permitted by the Natural Gas Act, and did not amount to a grant of "quick take" eminent domain power in either name or substance, the court did not usurp legislative power or otherwise overstep the boundaries of its judicial power; [3]-The appellate court could not review the landowners' attack of the underlying FERC order because it lacked appellate jurisdiction to hear collateral attacks on the FERC certificate.