Ceiba Land Company, LLC v. Bay Runner Pipeline, LLC

Summary

The Texas Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of Ceiba Land Company, LLC’s request for a temporary injunction challenging Bay Runner Pipeline, LLC’s condemnation proceedings. The court held that the county court acquired dominant jurisdiction over the condemnation action and that Ceiba could raise its challenges to Bay Runner’s condemnation authority and property description in that proceeding. The court concluded that Ceiba did not establish a probable right to relief in the district court.

Holdings

1. The county court acquired dominant jurisdiction over the condemnation proceeding because it was the first court in which the proceeding was filed, venue was proper, and Ceiba's objections to the commissioners' award entitled it to litigate the validity and merits of the condemnation in that court.
2. Ceiba did not establish a probable right to relief in the district court because its challenges to the condemnation proceeding could be litigated in the pending county-court action, making its collateral district-court attack premature and improper.
3. The district court did not have exclusive authority to enjoin the condemnation proceeding; district courts and county courts at law have concurrent jurisdiction in eminent-domain cases, and Ceiba's substantive objections could be addressed in the pending county-court proceeding.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying Ceiba's request for a temporary injunction based on the county court's dominant jurisdiction over the pending condemnation proceeding.
2. Whether Ceiba established a probable right to relief by showing that the county-court condemnation proceeding was void because Bay Runner was not a gas utility authorized to condemn property.
3. Whether Ceiba established a probable right to relief by showing that the property description in Bay Runner's condemnation petition was legally defective.

Disposition

affirmed