SABAL TRAIL TRANSMISSION LLC v. REAL ESTATE et al
ORDER re 35 Response to Motion, which the Court construes as an out-of-time motion for reconsideration. The motion is denied. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE CLAY D LAND on 12/16/2016. (CCL)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SABAL TRAIL TRANSMISSION, LLC,
REAL ESTATE, et al.,
O R D E R
Defendant Mae Ola Alston Ra’Oof, who is proceeding pro se,
Transmission, LLC the Right to Condemn farmland belonging to the
Estate of Richard Alston and Bobbie Alston, et al.”
2, ECF No. 35 in 4:16-cv-119.
Ra’oof attached several exhibits
to her brief, including a notice of administrator for the estate
of Rufus Alston.
Though Ra’Oof did not state the basis for her
request or explain the relevance of the exhibits she submitted,
the Court considers her brief to be an out-of-time motion for
reconsideration of the Court’s previous order granting partial
reconsideration is denied.
established as a matter of law that it has a right to condemn
the easements under the Natural Gas Act.”
Order Granting Mots.
for Partial Summ. J. & Mots. for Prelim. Inj. 15, ECF No. 27 in
concluded that “Sabal Trail is entitled to immediate possession
of the easements once it posts proper security bonds with the
Clerk of the Court for each condemned property.”
Id. at 21.
This ruling means that the Court has already granted Sabal Trail
the right to condemn the farmland at issue in this case.
did not provide any legal basis for the Court to reconsider its
The Court notes that Ra’Oof previously filed a motion to
Defendants believed that they had reached a deal with Sabal
Trail regarding the easement; those Defendants sought to enforce
See Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss, ECF No. 13 in 4:16-
The Court denied the motion to dismiss because “the
proper vehicle for asserting objections and defenses to a taking
is the answer, not a motion to dismiss.”
Order Granting Mots.
for Partial Summ. J. & Mots. for Prelim. Inj. 9.
Sabal Trail identified twenty-eight individuals who may have an
interest in the property.
Defendants asserted in their motion
to dismiss that eight individuals agreed to a deal with Sabal
And Ra’Oof submitted an exhibit suggesting that five
additional Defendants would agree to a deal.
ECF No. 35-8 in 4:16-cv-119.
Def.’s Br. Ex. B,
But Defendants did not establish
that everyone who has an interest in the property agreed to the
could not acquire the easement by contract.
For all of these
granting partial summary judgment in favor of Sabal Trail.
The next step in this case is determination of the amount
of just compensation.
The case is currently in discovery, which
Discovery will close on March 31, 2017.
judgment motions are due by May 15, 2017.
Id. at 16.
If there is a
genuine fact dispute on the amount of just compensation, then
the Court will hold proceedings to determine the amount of just
Of course, if Defendants can reach a deal with
Sabal Trail to which all of the individuals who hold an interest
in the property agree, then such further proceedings would be
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 16th day of December, 2016.
s/Clay D. Land
CLAY D. LAND
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?