Here’s a worth-reading decision from the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (the court that has exclusive jurisdiction to hear major regulatory takings claims agains the federal government), litigated and won by colleague Mark (Thor) Hearne, II.
In Dana R. Hodges Trust v. United States, No. 09-289 L (Oct. 25, 2011), the CFC concluded the federal government granted the property owners’ summary judgment on their takings claim. Rail-to-trails cases are detailed (see Preasault v. United States, 100 F.3d 1525 (Fed. Cir. 1996) and pages 2-3 of the CFC’s opinion for the legal framework), but the short story is that the railroad easment the property owners gave the federal government many years ago does not extend to its use as a recreational trail:
The court finds that the railroad’s easements in these Plaintiffs’ properties in the northern segment were for railroad purposes and that, for the same reasons discussed supra with respect to the easements in the southern segment, such railroad purposes do not extend to recreational trail usage. Similarly, it is not necessary then to address the third prong of the Preseault II inquiry (whether the easement terminated prior to the alleged taking).
Slip op. at 16. Next step: determination of the compensaton owed.
Media reports on the decision here and here.
Dana R. Hodges Trust v. United States, No 09-289 L (Oct. 25, 2011)