Judicial:
Caquelin v. United States, No. 14-37L, 2018 WL 5813009 (Fed. Cl. Nov. 6, 2018)
This rails-to-trails takings case is before the court after a trial held on remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The remand directed the court to develop a factual record bearing on the government’s contention that a set of precedents in the court of appeals should be overruled. The government had argued on appeal that a recent decision of the Supreme Court, had undercut prior decisions by the Federal Circuit (and, indeed, the Supreme Court) relating to the analysis of takings claims in the rails-to-trails context. because the “Arkansas Game decision does raise questions about Ladd [v. United States, 630 F.3d 1015 (Fed. Cir. 2010) ],” and other earlier rails-to-trails decisions by the court of appeals.).
The case has its genesis in a Notice of Interim Trail Use (“NITU”) issued by the federal Surface Transportation Board (“STB”), which authorized conversion of a portion of a railroad line located in Hardin and Franklin Counties, Iowa and its attendant right-of-way into a public recreational trail pursuant to Section 208 of the National Trails System Act Amendments of 1983, Pub. L. No. 98-11, § 208, 97 Stat. 42, 98 (“Trails Act”) (codified at 16 U.S.C. § 1247(d) ). Plaintiffs, owned two parcels of land adjacent to and under the railroad right-of-way on the date of the STB’s action. For one parcel, the predecessor railroad had acquired its interest by a right of way deed, and for the other parcel, the railroad had acquired its rights by condemnation. The successor railroad held easements limited to railroad purposes that were exceeded by issuance of the NITU, rendering the government liable for taking plaintiffs’ property without just compensation under the Fifth Amendment. The government was found liable for a taking of plaintiff’s property on July 3, 2013, upon issuance of the NITU.
Lanie Farms, Inc. v. Cleco Power, LLC, et al. Additional Party Names: Highlines Constr. Co., Inc., Util. Lines Constr. Servs., Inc., 2018-285 (La. App. 3 Cir. 11/7/18)
Plaintiff, Lanie Farms, Inc. (Lanie Farms), filed suit against CLECO Power, LLC (CLECO) and Utility Lines Construction Services, Inc. d/b/a Highlines Construction Company, Inc. (Highlines), seeking damages for the economic losses and remediation expenses it incurred as a result of Defendants’ construction and installation of new electrical poles and power lines along a servitude that traversed property farmed and leased by Lanie Farms. During trial, Defendants moved for involuntary dismissal. The trial court denied the motion and ultimately ruled in Lanie Farms’ favor, awarding $38,000.00 in damages plus interest and costs. Lanie Farms then moved for a new trial on the issue of damages only. After the trial court denied the motion, Lanie Farms filed its appeal to this court, challenging the trial court’s general damage award as well as its failure to grant a new trial. CLECO and Highlines answered the appeal, assigning as error the trial court’s denial of their motion for involuntary dismissal and its casting Defendants in judgment.
After reviewing the record evidence, the court found no manifest error or abuse of discretion in the trial court judgment and affirmed.
Regulatory:
Petitions for Rulemaking: Food Safety and Inspection Service, The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has been delegated the authority to exercise the functions of the Secretary as provided in the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.), and the Egg Product Inspection Act (EPIA) (21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq.). These statutes mandate that FSIS protect the public by ensuring that meat and poultry products are safe, wholesome, unadulterated, and properly labeled and packaged. The Administrative Procedures Act requires that Federal agencies give interested persons the right to petition for issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule (5 U.S.C. 553(e)).  Info HERE