Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States
572 U.S. 93
| SCOTUS | 2014Background
- Congress granted railroad rights of way through public lands under the General Railroad Right-of-Way Act of 1875 to spur western settlement and railroad construction.
- The 1875 Act conveyed a right of way to a railroad “to the extent of one hundred feet on each side” of the center line and could be secured by actual construction or filing a map.
- A 1976 patent to Melvin and Lulu Brandt conveyed fee simple title to Fox Park land but reserved railroad rights of way; abandonment provisions terminated certain roads if unused for five years.
- The Laramie, Hahn's Peak & Pacific Railway right of way crossed Brandt’s land; the line was abandoned and tracks removed with Board approval in 2004.
- The United States sued to quiet title to the abandoned right of way; Brandt counterclaimed that the easement had terminated and he held full title free of the easement.
- Lower courts held the United States retained an implied reversionary interest in the 1875 Act right of way; the case was certified for Supreme Court review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| What interest did the 1875 Act convey to railroads? | Brandt: grant was an easement; ownership reverts upon abandonment. | United States: grant reserved an implied reversionary interest. | Grant was an easement; no implied reversionary interest. |
| Does Great Northern displace Townsend/Stringham on reversion? | Townsend/Stringham support reversion; Great Northern does not overrule them. | Great Northern shows easement with no surface-rights reversion for subsurface minerals. | Great Northern supports easement characterization; does not negate Townsend/Stringham reversion concepts. |
| Effect of abandonment on Brandt parcel? | If abandonment terminates the easement, Brandt holds fee title free of burden. | Abandonment terminates the easement in the land; title remains with underlying patent constraints. | Abandonment terminates the easement; Brandt’s land becomes unburdened, full title resumes. |
Key Cases Cited
- Northern Pacific R. Co. v. Townsend, 190 U.S. 267 (1903) (implied condition of reverter in pre-1871 rail right of way grants)
- Rio Grande Western R. Co. v. Stringham, 239 U.S. 44 (1915) (rights of way granted under 1875 Act subject to reverter if unused)
- Great Northern R. Co. v. United States, 315 U.S. 262 (1942) (1875 Act grants only an easement, not a fee; surface rights only; rejects subsurface title claim)