{"id":16782,"date":"2012-08-22T13:17:57","date_gmt":"2012-08-22T18:17:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/?p=16782"},"modified":"2012-08-22T13:18:03","modified_gmt":"2012-08-22T18:18:03","slug":"texas-supreme-court-reinforces-denbury-decision-on-eminent-domain-again","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/08\/22\/texas-supreme-court-reinforces-denbury-decision-on-eminent-domain-again\/","title":{"rendered":"Texas Supreme Court Reinforces Denbury Decision on Eminent Domain. Again."},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

Photo by Tom Pennington\/Getty Images<\/p>

Pipe is stacked at the southern site of the Keystone XL pipeline in Cushing, Oklahoma. Construction of the southern leg began last week.<\/p><\/div>\n

For the third time, The Texas Supreme Court has ruled against a pipeline company’s use of eminent domain.<\/p>\n

But the oil and gas industry did not give this one up without a fight.<\/p>\n

Here’s some background: In a landmark ruling<\/a> at the Texas Supreme Court last August, a rice farmer in Beaumont (along with a rice farming consortium, Texas Rice Land Partners) won his case against the Denbury Green pipeline company, which had used eminent domain to route a carbon dioxide pipeline across his land. The 24-inch line stretches from Donaldsonville, Louisiana to the Hastings Field, outside of Houston, Texas. The farmer, Mike Latta, argued that the pipeline wasn’t in the public interest, as it was a private pipeline that would only be used by one company. The Supreme Court of Texas agreed<\/a>. (But the case took several years to make it to the Supreme Court, and in the meantime the company built the pipeline anyways<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

Then the pipeline company — joined by the Texas Oil and Gas Association and several others associated with the industry (including\u00a0notable names<\/a>\u00a0like the Koch Pipeline Company, Kinder Morgan and Occidental Chemical)\u00a0— \u00a0asked for an entire rehearing of the case, something of a rare move. In March, the\u00a0Supreme\u00a0Court said no, the decision stands<\/a>. Then the pipeline company Denbury Green\u00a0asked again for a rehearing.<\/p>\n

This week comes the latest answer: No<\/a>. And as the decision still stands, it could become the basis for more legal arguments against pipelines using eminent domain to seize private land.<\/p>\n

Related<\/h4>
Posts<\/h5>