Rails to Trails going back to Supreme Court

[spuwho]

Per Trains NewsWire

Since the Feds passed the RR ROW Act in 1875, it was full bore for the railroads.  However as more and more miles get abandoned, some govt entities don't want lose their grip.  More lawsuits follow.

WASHINGTON – For the second time in history, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review a case about rail-trails. At stake is public ownership of thousands of miles of right-of-way, some of which has been converted into multi-use trails. The Court accepted the petition in the case of Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, and is expected to hear arguments in January.

In the mid-to-late-1800s, Congress passed the General Railroad Right-of-Way Act of 1875, which allowed government to grant rights-of-way to railroads on public lands. In 1976, Melvin and Lulu Brandt acquired roughly 80 acres of land in Fox Park, Wyo. from the United States. That land was bisected by an existing railroad right-of-way held by Laramie, Hahns Peak & Pacific, a Union Pacific predecessor. After the Brandt's acquired the land, the line, then owned by Wyoming Colorado Railroad, was abandoned.

In 2005, the Forest Service claimed a "reversionary interest" in the land under the 1875 Act, with the intent of building a rail-trail. The 21-mile Medicine Bow trail was completed 30 miles west of Brandt's land after it was abandoned, but trail advocates hope to build a connector trail that would link Medicine Bow to other nearby trails, which could go through the disputed area.

The Brandt's argue that the government's position is contrary to over a century of precedent in which courts have interpreted rights-of-way granted under the 1875 Act as easements in which the government holds no interest once the land is transferred. Under that interpretation, when the railroad abandoned the easement on Brandt's property, ownership would not revert to the government, but remain with the Brandt's. But the government claimed that it, not the Brandt's, held the interest in the right-of-way.

A district court and the 10th Circuit Court rejected the Brandt's argument. The 10th Circuit's opinion noted, however, that this finding was contrary to precedent in the Seventh and Federal Circuit courts, both of which have held that the rights-of-way did not revert to the government once they are abandoned by the railroad. The Supreme Court will have to decide which court ruling to uphold.