Ladd v. United States
713 F.3d 648
| Fed. Cir. | 2013Background
- Ladd landowners own parcels near the US-Mexico border in southern Arizona and had a 100-foot wide, 76.2-mile railroad right-of-way historically used by El Paso and successors.
- In 2006 the STB issued a Notice of Interim Trail Use or Abandonment (NITU) allowing conversion of the railroad to a public trail under the Trails Act.
- The landowners sued in 2007 claiming the 2006 NITU was a compensable Fifth Amendment taking; the CFC dismissed as not a taking.
- This court reversed in Ladd I, holding the takings claim accrued on the date the 2006 NITU issued and remanding for liability and damages determinations.
- During remand, the government produced a 1998 NITU; landowners claimed estates and noticed lack; CFC held accrual began in 1998, time-barred.
- Lindsey family challenge: CFC concluded Lindsey deed conveyed the land to the railroad in fee simple; on appeal, Lindsey waived challenge to that construction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the statute of limitations bars takings claims | Ladd asserts accrual suspended by concealment or inherent unknowability of 1998 NITU. | Government contends accrual occurred in 1998 or 2006 and is time-barred. | Not time-barred; accrual suspension applies and 1998 NITU lacks notice. |
| Scope of the mandate on remand | Ladd I limited remand to compensation, not liability. | Record on liability open on remand; government liable for taking if facts support. | Mandate did not bar addressing government liability on remand. |
| Proper accrual date under accrual suspension | 1998 NITU was inherently unknowable; suspension should apply. | 1997 exemption and notice would ordinarily place landowners on notice of possible NITU. | Accrual suspension applies; 1998 NITU could not be known; not time-barred. |
| Lindsey deed conveyance of property interest | Lindsey conveyed only an easement, not fee simple. | Lindsey deed conveyed fee simple; challenge waived for failure to raise below. | Waived; Lindsey lacks compensable interest; affirmed dismissal on Lindsey issue. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ladd v. United States, 630 F.3d 1015 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (takings accrual date fixed on 2006 NITU; remand for liability/damages)
- Barclay v. United States, 443 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (issuance of a NITU triggers accrual date)
- Caldwell v. United States, 391 F.3d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (accrual and liability standards for takings cases)
- Ingrum v. United States, 560 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (accrual suspension when unknowable or concealed acts)
- Holmes v. United States, 657 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (recognizes inherent unknowability standard in accrual analysis)