Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States
| Marvin Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States | |
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued January 14, 2014 Decided March 10, 2014 |
|
| Full case name | Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust et al. v. United States |
| Docket nos. | 12–1173 |
| Citations | 572 U.S. ___ (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Prior history | On writ on certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit; United States v. Brandt, 496 Fed. Appx. 822 (CA10 2012) (per curiam) |
| Holding | |
| Rights of way under the 1875 Act are easements that terminate by the railroad’s abandonment, leaving a private owner's land unburdened. | |
| Court membership | |
|
|
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Roberts, joined by Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Kagan |
| Dissent | Sotomayor |
| Laws applied | |
| 43 U.S.C. § 934 | |
Marvin Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, 572 U.S. ___ (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a railroad right-of-way granted under the General Railroad Right-of-Way Act of 1875 is an easement. Therefore, when a railroad abandons such a right-of-way, the easement disappears, and the land owner regains unburdened use of the land.
From the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 to the Gadsden Purchase in 1853, the United States rapidly expanded westward. Responding to the California Gold Rush, Congress took steps to encourage the development, settlement, and full possession of the West. Doing so required reliable, efficient ways to transport people and property to and through them. Congress therefore passed numerous acts encouraging railroad development.
From 1850 to 1871, these acts typically allocated rights-of-way to specific named railroads. These rights-of-way were initially construed as an "absolute" grant in "both the fee and possession". Later they were construed to convey "a limited fee, made on an implied condition of reverter" to the United States if the railroad stopped using the land for railroad purposes.
Public opinion began to turn against these generous grants in the late 1860s. By the 1870s, legislators instead preferred to reserve public lands for settlers. An 1872 House resolution endorsed the change:
Resolved, that in the judgment of this House the policy of granting subsidies in public lands to railroads and other corporations ought to be discontinued, and that every consideration of public policy and equal justice to the whole people requires that the public lands should be held for the purpose of securing homesteads to actual settlers, and for educational purposes, as may be provided by law.
...
Wikipedia