Rogers v. United States, 814 F.3d 1299

Background

Seaboard acquired and operated a 12.43-mile Sarasota–Venice, FL rail corridor through a series of deeds (1910–1941); six deeds (four northern, two southern) were central to title disputes.
In 2004 the Surface Transportation Board issued a Notice of Interim Trail Use (NITU) under the Trails Act, preserving the corridor for conversion to a recreational trail and triggering takings claims by adjoining landowners.
Over 100 landowners sued for just compensation, alleging the original conveyances granted only easements (reversion to abutting owners when rail use ceased), not fee simple title.
The Court of Federal Claims granted the government partial summary judgment, finding the six deeds unambiguously conveyed fee simple title to Seaboard, leaving plaintiffs with no compensable property interest.
The Federal Circuit certified a question to the Florida Supreme Court about whether Florida statute, policy, or factual circumstances could override clear deed language; the Florida Supreme Court answered no.
Based on the deed language and Florida Supreme Court guidance, the Federal Circuit affirmed that Seaboard obtained fee simple title and plaintiffs held no compensable property interest.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the contested deeds conveyed only an easement (railroad use) or fee simple title	Deeds should be read as conveying only the estate necessary for railroad use (an easement); precedent and statutes limit railroads’ ability to hold fee simple	Deeds’ plain language conveys "all right, title, and interest" in fee simple; no statutory limit overrides clear deed language	Deeds unambiguously conveyed fee simple to Seaboard; plaintiffs have no compensable interest
Whether Fla. Stat. §2241/4354 or state policy limits a railroad’s interest regardless of deed language	Statute and public policy restrict voluntary grants to easements and prevent fee-simple title for rail use	Statute applies to conveyances without consideration; state policy does not override unambiguous deed language	Florida Supreme Court: statute/policy do not limit a railroad’s interest when deed language is clear; federal court adopts this view
Whether preconveyance survey/occupation (survey, location, track laying before deed) limits transfer to an easement (Preseault II argument)	If railroad surveyed or occupied before acquisition, transfer should be treated as easement, not fee	Florida law does not impose such a factual limitation on fee conveyances; deed language controls	Florida Supreme Court and Federal Circuit: factual circumstances do not override clear fee conveyance language
Whether subsequent foreclosure or later conveyances defeated railroad’s title	Foreclosure of BLE (prior grantor) or later transactions extinguished Seaboard’s fee	Records show corridor lands were not part of foreclosure; 1941 conveyance reconfirmed fee to Seaboard	Court found foreclosure did not defeat Seaboard’s title; 1941 deed confirmed fee simple ownership

Key Cases Cited

Caldwell v. United States, 391 F.3d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (STB has exclusive authority over rail line abandonment and related preemption issues)
Preseault v. ICC, 494 U.S. 1 (1990) (Rails-to-Trails takings framework and NITU implications)
Preseault v. United States, 100 F.3d 1525 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (en banc) (analysis of when railroad acquisitions amount to easements versus fee interests)
Barclay v. United States, 443 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (standard for reviewing rails-to-trails takings questions)
Wyatt v. United States, 271 F.3d 1090 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (requiring a private party’s valid interest as prerequisite for a taking)
Ladd v. United States, 713 F.3d 648 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (summary judgment review standard in Federal Circuit)
Rogers v. United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 607 (2010) (Bird Bay decision — Court of Federal Claims holding BLE deed conveyed fee simple)
Rogers v. United States, 107 Fed. Cl. 387 (2012) (Rogers III — Court of Federal Claims holding the four northern deeds conveyed fee simple)