TS & C Investments, L.L.C. v. Beusa Energy, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• dismissing class action nuisance claim because “plaintiffs have not demonstrated whose property is physically adjacent, closely adjacent or remote from the well site”
• dismissing a claim when the plaintiffs sought to represent a class of “all businesses” adversely affected by a well blowout because that contained no geographical limitation
• “Where the state's highest court has not yet spoken on an issue, the federal district court may look to the state's appellate courts for guidance”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).