Mountain Valley Pipeline v. Brian C. and Doris W. McCurdy
238 W. Va. 200
| W. Va. | 2016Background
- Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC (MVP), a private pipeline company, sought to survey and later construct a ~300‑mile interstate natural gas pipeline; ~85–95% of the gas to be transported is owned by MVP affiliates.
- Bryan and Doris McCurdy own ~185 acres on the proposed route in Monroe County and denied MVP access for surveys.
- MVP notified the McCurdys it would seek entry under W. Va. Code § 54‑1‑3 if access was not granted; the McCurdys sued for declaratory and injunctive relief.
- The federal court remanded for lack of jurisdiction; the Monroe County circuit court granted declaratory relief and both preliminary and permanent injunctions, concluding MVP lacked the eminent‑domain power because the pipeline was not for a West Virginia public use.
- West Virginia Supreme Court affirmed: under Chapter 54 a company may survey only if invested with the power of eminent domain, and a taking is authorized only for a public use benefiting West Virginians — the record showed no firm commitments that WV consumers or non‑affiliate WV producers would receive gas.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (McCurdy) | Defendant's Argument (MVP) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether W. Va. Code § 54‑1‑3 requires the company to be vested with eminent domain power before entering to survey land | §54‑1‑3 permits only entities invested with eminent domain to enter for surveying; MVP lacks that power absent public use | Surveying is a preliminary act that does not require a prior finding of public use | Held: Survey entry under §54‑1‑3 is limited to entities invested with eminent domain; public‑use prerequisite applies to surveying |
| Whether MVP is invested with eminent domain power under W. Va. Code § 54‑1‑1 | No: MVP’s pipeline will not serve West Virginia consumers or independent WV producers; thus not a public use | Yes: Pipeline serves public purposes (transporting WV gas to market), could benefit WV owners, economic development, and severance tax | Held: MVP not invested with eminent domain because the pipeline, per record, does not demonstrably serve a West Virginia public use |
| Proper test/standard for determining public use for a private corporation | Apply controlling precedent (fixed and definite use principles) and require a showing that WV public will have a right to use gas | MVP urges modern/broader public‑purpose approach, and that transporting WV gas to market suffices | Held: Court applied statutory text and precedent requiring public‑use showing for private entities; no error in requiring demonstrable WV public benefit |
| Whether potential federal FERC authorization or speculative future taps defeat the McCurdys’ state‑law claim | State law relief is available even if federal FERC process may later authorize entry; lack of current WV commitments supports injunction | MVP argued conditional FERC certificate could permit surveys and federal eminent domain might render state ruling moot | Held: State courts may enforce state eminent domain constraints; potential federal relief does not invalidate the McCurdys’ state‑law entitlement to injunction until public use is shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Varner v. Martin, 21 W.Va. 534 (1883) (articulates the ‘‘fixed and definite’’ public‑use test)
- Carnegie Nat. Gas Co. v. Swiger, 72 W.Va. 557 (1913) (applies fixed and definite test to natural‑gas pipelines)
- Charleston Urban Renewal Auth. v. Courtland Co., 203 W.Va. 528 (1998) (recognizes broadening of public‑use concept for government entities but warns private entities get greater scrutiny)
- Handley v. Cook, 162 W.Va. 629 (1979) (discusses public‑utility attributes and public‑use analysis for utility condemnations)
- Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) (federal recognition of broader ‘‘public purpose’’ test but cautions against takings conferring purely private benefit)