Here's the video of the oral arguments held earlier today in the Iowa Supreme Court in a high-profile pipeline case. In Puntenney v. Iowa Utilities Board, the court is considering a case at the intersection of the law of public utilities, and condemnation law. The basic question the court is trying to solve is whether a finding by the IUB that the pipeline serves a "public convenience and necessity" makes a determination of the public use supporting the resulting condemnations unnecessary?
Here's a description of the issues from the court's web site:
The district court denied petitions for judicial review of the Iowa Utilities Board’s (IUB) decision to grant a permit to Dakota Access, LLC, for the construction of a hazardous liquid pipeline pursuant to Iowa Code ch. 479B. On appeal, the petitioners argue the district court erred in affording the IUB the authority to define the term “public convenience and necessity” under Iowa Code § 479B.9 and in affirming the IUB’s determination that the pipeline would promote public convenience and necessity. The appellants further argue Dakota Access’ exercise of eminent domain violated the Iowa and United States Constitutions, as well as Iowa Code §§ 6A.21 and 6A.22.
Briefs are also posted on that page, if you want to get into it more.
As we've mentioned earlier, pipelines and related issues are a super hot topic nationwide, so be sure to register for the 2019 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference, January 24-26, 2019 in Palm Springs, California. There, we will have no less that two major sessions on pipeline issues, presented by faculty who are right on the front lines of the controversies and challenges. The first (Where You Haven't Gone Before: New Ways to Challenge the Take) is, as the title reflects, about creative ways to challenge and defend pipeline takings. The second, focuses on the unique compensation issues which these takings produce, "Compensation Pitfalls: How to Avoid Problems." Come, join us!
