For you rails-to-trails fans, here’s the latest from the Federal Circuit. In Biery v . United States, No. 13-5082 (June 2, 2014), the court held that interests which certain Kansas property owners conveyed to railroads back in the day were grants in fee simple, and some were grants of an easement.
The issue
For those of you who are members of the ABA, here’s a tangible member benefit.
On Wednesday, April 9, 2014, tune in for a free webinar, “Rails-to-Trails and the Impact of Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States.” The program is sponsored by the Real Property, Trusts & Estates Legal Education and Uniform Laws Group.
Here are the details:
ABA-RPTE Professors’ Corner – A FREE monthly webinar featuring a panel of law professors, addressing topics of interest to practitioners of real estate and trusts/estates
This is a One Hour WEBINAR
Wednesday, April 9, 2014
12:30 pm Eastern / 11:30 am Central / 10:30 am Mountain / 9:30 am Pacific
Register online here.
March’s Program: “Rails-to-Trails and the Impact of Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States”
Professors’ Corner is a monthly webinar (on the second Wednesday of each month) featuring a panel of law professors, discussing recent cases or issues of interest to real estate or trust and estate practitioners and scholars.
Speakers:
On March 10, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Brandt Revocable Trust v. U.S., involving the interpretation of the General Railroad Right-of-Way Act of 1875. The case involved a railroad right of way obtained in 1908, crossing land conveyed by the U.S. to the Brandt family in a 1976 land patent that did not specify what would happen if the railroad later relinquished its right of way (which occurred some years later). In the case, the U.S. sought to quiet title to the abandoned right of way, including the portion that crossed the land conveyed by the Brandt patent. Reversing the Tenth Circuit, which had affirmed a grant of summary judgment for the U.S., the Supreme Court held that the right of way was only an easement and was extinguished when the railroad abandoned it. The decision has already created some substantial consternation regarding its potential impact on the Rails-to-Trails movement and recreational trail development along abandoned rail corridors.
We’re registered, and you should too.
Continue Reading Mark Your Calendars: “Rails-to-Trails and the Impact of Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States” (4/9/2014) – Free To ABA Members
It’s Friday, so we’re slacking a bit on the blogging. But our colleagues at the Nossaman firm have given us a couple of good pieces for our reading enjoyment.
Professor Richard Epstein shares his insight about the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent 8-1 decision in Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, No. 12-1173 (Mar. 10, 2014).
The issue in the case was whether the federal government retained an “implied reversionary interest” when it issued railroad patents to private landowners, or whether these grants were subject
In addition to the initial media coverage of and commentary about the Supreme Court’s 8-1 decision in Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, No. 12-1173 (Mar. 10, 2014) rendered earlier this week, there has been more, mostly focused on the final lines of Justice Sotomayor’s solo dissent:
By changing course today, the Court
Here are some reports and commentary on the Supreme Court’s opinion in Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, No. 12-1173 (Mar. 10, 2014).
As we predicted it would after oral argument, today the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the property owner’s favor in Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, No.12-1173 (Mar. 10, 2014). Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the entire Court less Justice Sotomayor, who filed a solo dissent. SCOUTSblog posts a summary of
This morning, I joined my Owners’ Counsel colleagues Leslie Fields and Joe Waldo (the programming co-chairs), and more than 100 fellow eminent domain experts in New Orleans under the auspices of ALI-CLE at our annual gathering for the start of 2 1/2 days of legal education.
Joe and Leslie asked me to join Professor James
Update: More thoughts here, after having heard the argument recording, available here:
Here’s the transcript from today’s oral arguments in Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, No. 12-1173. That’s the case in which the Court is considering the meaning of the term railroad “right of way” as used in an
Tomorrow, Tuesday, January 14, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, No. No. 12-1173. That’s the case in which the Court is considering the meaning of the term railroad “right of way” as used in an 1875 federal statute.
As our amici brief argues, if