Ladd v. United States
108 Fed. Cl. 609
Fed. Cl.2012Background
- Rails-to-Trails takings case on remand after Federal Circuit instruction to determine compensation for temporary taking.
- Six-year statute of limitations applies; accrues when first NITU issued as per Ladd/Barclay line of authority.
- Five plaintiffs (Heinzl, Castro, Windsor-Brown, Ladd, Miller) lack timely claims under six-year rule; Lindsey lacks compensable property interest; Singletree Ranch and Miller Ranch Trust claim valid temporary takings.
- Arizona law governs property interests in the railroad corridor for determining compensable interests.
- Remand directs calculation of just compensation for Singletree Ranch and Miller Ranch Trust; existing NITU sequence treated as continuous government action; further extension of NITU impacts duration of taking.
- Court retains jurisdiction to enter judgment and oversee appraiser arrangement; dismissal of certain plaintiffs and denial of relief for others follow.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether five plaintiffs are barred by the six-year statute of limitations. | Heinzl, Castro, Windsor-Brown, Ladd, Miller argue remand allows damages assessment. | Limitations are jurisdictional and run from 1998 NITU accrual; time-barred. | Barred; five plaintiffs dismissed for lack of timely claims. |
| Whether Lindsey has a cognizable compensable property interest. | Lindsey asserts ownership interests beneath railroad corridor. | Arizona law recognizes fee simple ownership unless limited; Lindsey has no compensable interest. | Lindsey dismissed; no cognizable compensable interest. |
| Whether Singletree Ranch and Miller Ranch Trust have fee simple interests and entitlement to compensation. | Singletree and Miller Ranch Trust hold fee simple in underlying land; remand directs compensation. | Easement scope and abandonment questions may bar or limit liability. | Entitled to compensation subject to Preseault factors; damages to be apportioned. |
| Whether the NITU created a temporary taking and its duration remains ongoing. | Taking began with NITU; series of NITUs constitute continuous government action; taking end uncertain. | Temporary taking lasts only during negotiated period unless consummation occurs; STB retains jurisdiction. | Yes, temporary taking; duration governed by continuous NITU action until consummation; valuation dates set. |
| What governing law and framework apply to evaluating the underlying property interests and scope of easements. | Preseault framework applies; property interests determine liability. | Railroad easement under 1875 Act may limit scope; abandonment and trail use affect takings. | Arizona law applies; Preseault factors govern whether trail use exceeds easement; abandonment status relevant. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ladd v. United States, 630 F.3d 1015 (Fed.Cir.2010) (takings accrual and compensation framework in rails-to-trails)
- Barclay v. United States, 443 F.3d 1368 (Fed.Cir.2006) (series of NITU orders treated as continuous government action)
- Caldwell v. United States, 391 F.3d 1226 (Fed.Cir.2004) (accrual principles for takings in rails-to-trails)
- Preseault v. United States, 100 F.3d 1525 (Fed.Cir.1996) (test for whether easement allows trail use and scope)
- Hash v. United States, 403 F.3d 1308 (Fed.Cir.2005) (reversionary interests under 1875 Act in rail corridors)
- City of Tucson v. Koerber, 313 P.2d 411 (Ariz.1957) (Arizona abandonment standard for real property interests)