Yes, you have previously stated this opinion, but you have not explained why you defend Conoco's lawyers for failing to present evidence to support their argument.
Because the plaintiffs lawyers were not arguing under the penn central test. I'm not saying that is wasn't a mistake, I'm just saying that its not the egregious error that you are making it out to be.
Either way however, this has no bearing on whether the company has a valid property right to assert. If anything, the bigger the mistake on the part of the lawyers makes is better for the argument since it was their negligence that cost them the case.