Legal Opinion
Caquelin v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided June 21, 2017No. 2016-1663UnpublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Per curiam
This rails-to-trails case involves property owned by the Caquelins that, in 2013, was subject to a railroad-held easement limited to’ railroad use. The railroad or its predecessors had held the easement since 1870. It is undisputed that the easement would terminate when the railroad ceased using the easement for its stated purpose and abandoned the line.
In May 2013, the railroad filed a Notice of Exemption with the Surface Transportation Board, seeking the Board’s permission to abandon the line and invoking a regulatory exemption from the usual rail-use-related standards that the Board…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Nollan v. California Coastal CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Dolan v. City of TigardSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning AgencySupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management Dist.Supreme Court of the United States · 2013
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Caquelin v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020
- Memmer v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2022
- Balagna v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2018
- Banks v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2018
- Bratcher v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2018
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.