Protest to Stop Pipeline

2014 has been the year of eminent domain protesting. There were farmers who planted crops to spell out their protest, a Willie Nelson rally, and old fashion protestors. Public meetings have been shut down by the fire marshall. Protestors are loud. They want their voices heard.  

The latest protest rally is in response to a Houston based pipeline company that wants to build a pipeline in Massachusttes. The protest brought together property rights activists, environmentalists, land owners, and elected officials. All are claiming that the pipeline company does not care about land or landowners. [AP via Houston Chronicle] [AP via Brownsville Herald]

NFIB Amicus Brief to US Supreme Court Supporting Riparian Property Rights

A Florida city wanted to protect seagrasses. So, it prohibited docks to promote seagrass growth. Property owners, with riparian rights, wanted to build docks to access the water.  The conflict ended up in court.

Landowners went to state court seeking property right protections for their riparian rights. The city moved the suit to federal courts. The 11th Circuit held that riparian rights, state based property rights, are not protected by the US Constitution. Litigants await word from the US Supreme Court. [Owner’s Counsel] [US Supreme Court Docket]

TXDOT agreement with Private Toll Corporation Revealed

Want to see the details of an agreement between TXDOT and a private toll company delineating the private toll companies eminent domain authority? The Texas Observer delivers.

The Texas Observer also gives us this piece of trivia: “The Texas Turnpike Corporation still has eminent domain powers because it formed one day before the 1991 repeal went into effect.” [TX Observer]

Baseball is an American Pastime. Baseball Fields Require Acres of Land.

Americans love their baseball. Hartford, CT loves baseball and wants to build a new minor league stadium. The city knows where they want the new stadium, but the people who own that land disagree.

The city and landowners couldn’t reach an agreement to sell the land to the city. Naturally, the city is opting for eminent domain.

The city proposes to take 14 pieces of private property for a total of $1.98 million. The city will then turn the land over to a developer for a $350M baseball stadium project. [WNPR]

 

Claremont to Use Eminent Domain to Condemn Water Utility

Claremont asked voters to approve the City condemnation of the water utility. This marks the second local government in recent months to utilize eminent domain to acquire a privately owned utility. [Inland Valley Daily Bulletin]

Refreshing our Recollection: Earlier Missoula, MT has begun condemnation process for its privately owned water utility.  [Missoula Independent] 

Texas Supreme Court to Decide if Denial of a Water Permit is a Compensable Taking of Private Property

Bragg v. Edwards Aquifer is a story about a pecan farmer who wanted to water his pecan orchards. His request for water was denied. He went to court.

The trial court and the appellate court agreed with the pecan farmer- the denial of the water permit was a taking of his private property rights and he deserved compensation.  

We’re now at the Texas Supreme Court. The landowner has won twice. The response brief is due December 22nd. Time will tell whether denying a water permit is a compensable taking of private property in Texas. [Bragg v. Edwards Aquifer]

Eminent Domain to Condemn a Water Utility

Usually when you think eminent domain, you think a governmental entity is trying to acquire land. The Mountain Water Company is facing eminent domain by Missoula, MT.

By all accounts, Mountain Water Company is privately owned and operated. [Missoula Independent]  Legal fees in this eminent domain case for Missoula are $750,000 and there remains 6 months before trial. Public support favors using eminent domain. [Missoulian]

The ordeal raises an interesting question, can a private utility company be acquired by eminent domain?

 

Eagle Ford Land Partners Outstanding $1.6M Award from a Pipeline

On Halloween, the Texas Supreme Court set December 1st as the deadline for response to the Petition for Mandamus in Eagle Ford Land Partners.  Eagle Ford Land has a judgment for $1.6Million from a pipeline company that is not satisfied. Eagle Ford is asking the Texas Supreme Court to enforcement to judgement. 

Property Rights advocates from the Farm Bureau to the WildLife Association  to TPPF have lined up in support of Eagle Ford Rice Partners. [Eagle Ford Land Partners]