{"id":6973,"date":"2012-03-02T13:28:50","date_gmt":"2012-03-02T19:28:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/?p=6973"},"modified":"2012-03-06T11:27:47","modified_gmt":"2012-03-06T17:27:47","slug":"texas-supreme-court-reinforces-denbury-decision","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/03\/02\/texas-supreme-court-reinforces-denbury-decision\/","title":{"rendered":"Texas Supreme Court Reinforces Denbury Decision, Favors Landowners"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"attachment_6202\"  class=\"wp-caption module image right\" style=\"max-width: 300px;\"><a class=\"fancybox\" title=\"Pipeline companies are finding themselves with a new obstacle: defenders of private property rights.\" href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/files\/2012\/02\/3780481716_3b97b6a009_z.jpg\" rel=\"\"><img decoding=\"async\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-6202\" title=\"The Steam Pipeline\" src=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/files\/2012\/02\/3780481716_3b97b6a009_z-300x209.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"209\" srcset=\"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/files\/2012\/02\/3780481716_3b97b6a009_z-300x209.jpg 300w, https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/files\/2012\/02\/3780481716_3b97b6a009_z-620x433.jpg 620w, https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/files\/2012\/02\/3780481716_3b97b6a009_z-220x153.jpg 220w, https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/files\/2012\/02\/3780481716_3b97b6a009_z.jpg 640w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><p class=\"wp-media-credit\">Photo by Flickr user Stuck in Customs\/Creative Commons<\/p><p class=\"wp-caption-text\">Pipeline companies are finding themselves with a new obstacle: defenders of private property rights.<\/p><\/div>\n<h5>Dave Fehling of StateImpact Texas contributed reporting to this article.<\/h5>\n<p>The Texas Supreme Court sure is busy as of late. Today they released an updated opinion in the\u00a0Texas Rice Land Partners v. Denbury Green Pipeline-Texas case that could have <a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/02\/13\/pipeline-companies-fight-for-right-to-take-property\/\">big implications for the oil and gas industry and private landowners in Texas<\/a>. The bottom line is this: the court reinforced their original ruling today and denied a request to hear the case again, and that&#8217;s unwelcome news for the pipeline industry in Texas.<\/p>\n<p>The decision was originally made last fall. At issue was who decides whether or not a pipeline is a &#8220;common carrier,&#8221; i.e. one that can be used by other companies and is therefore considered a public project. If a pipeline company can justify that it&#8217;s a public project, that allows it to use eminent domain to construct and operate pipelines on private property, regardless of how the landowner affected may feel about it. (Read more on the case in our earlier story, <a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/02\/13\/pipeline-companies-fight-for-right-to-take-property\/\">Pipeline Companies Fight for Right to Take Property<\/a>.)<\/p>\n<p>In the Denbury decision, as it&#8217;s come to be known, the Texas Supreme Court sided with landowners, stating that\u00a0\u201cprivate property is constitutionally protected, and a private enterprise cannot acquire\u00a0condemnation power merely by checking boxes on a one-page form.&#8221; That one-page form is what pipeline companies send to the <a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/topic\/railroad-commission-of-texas\/\">Railroad Commission of Texas<\/a> in order to get &#8220;common carrier&#8221; status, which is what they use to justify their use of eminent domain.<\/p>\n<p>Today&#8217;s opinion strengthens the court&#8217;s siding with landowners.<!--more--><\/p>\n<div class=\"related-content alignleft\"><h4 class=\"related-header\">Related<\/h4><div class=\"links\"><h5>Posts<\/h5><ul><li class=\"link\"><a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/02\/13\/pipeline-companies-fight-for-right-to-take-property\/\">Pipeline Companies Fight for Right to Take Property<\/a><\/li><li class=\"link\"><a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/02\/14\/this-land-was-your-land-now-its-our-land-keystone-xl-and-eminent-domain\/\">This Land Was Your Land, Now It\u2019s Our Land: Keystone XL and Eminent Domain<\/a><\/li><li class=\"link\"><a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/02\/24\/farmer-loses-restraining-order-against-keystone-xl-pipeline\/\">Farmer Loses Restraining Order Against Keystone XL Pipeline<\/a><\/li><li class=\"link\"><a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/02\/27\/the-keystone-xl-pipeline-is-coming-to-texas\/\">The Keystone XL Pipeline is Coming to\u00a0Texas<\/a><\/li><li class=\"link\"><a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/02\/29\/how-keystone-xl-beat-a-farmers-restraining-order\/\">How Keystone XL Beat a Farmer\u2019s Restraining Order<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/div><div class=\"topics\"><h5>Topics<\/h5><p class=\"topic\"><img class=\"alignleft\" src=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/files\/2011\/09\/Railroad-Commission-of-Texas-60x60.jpg\" height=\"60\" width=\"60\" \/><a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/topic\/railroad-commission-of-texas\/\">What Is The Railroad Commission Of\u00a0Texas?<\/a><\/p><p class=\"topic\"><img class=\"alignleft\" src=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/files\/2011\/11\/131643233-60x60.jpg\" height=\"60\" width=\"60\" \/><a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/topic\/keystone-xl-pipeline\/\">What is the Keystone XL Pipeline?<\/a><\/p><\/div><\/div>\n<p>In a few additional footnotes to the original opinion, the court said today that a CO2* pipeline &#8220;cannot wield eminent domain to build a <em>private <\/em>pipeline, one limited in [its] use to the wells, stations, plants, and refineries of the owner. A common carrier transporting gas for hire implies a customer other than the pipeline owner itself,&#8221; they wrote. And that &#8220;to qualify as a common carrier with the power of eminent domain, the pipeline must serve the public; it cannot be built only for the builder\u2019s exclusive use.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI can\u2019t discern this changes anything of importance,&#8221; Amy Warr, an attorney for the Texas Riceland Partners, told StateImpact Texas. &#8220;We\u2019re happy.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Keith Strama, counsel for the Texas Oil &amp; Gas Association, is less pleased. His group petitioned the court to re-hear the case.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe\u2019re concerned it will mean more case-by-case litigation\u201d of pipeline eminent domain disputes, \u00a0he told StateImpact Texas, &#8220;imperiling the development of the state\u2019s pipeline infrastructure to meet growing demands of oil and gas production.\u00a0But we think it is limited to only CO2 and hydrogen\u201d pipelines, he said.<\/p>\n<p>Strama also told StateImpact Texas that he believes the ruling won&#8217;t affect the <a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/02\/14\/this-land-was-your-land-now-its-our-land-keystone-xl-and-eminent-domain\/\">ongoing battle between a farmer and the Keystone XL pipeline in northeast Texas<\/a>. In that case, a private landowner is questioning the company&#8217;s claim of eminent domain to route the pipeline through her farm. There should be \u201cno impact from the ruling or the order on the <a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/topic\/keystone-xl-pipeline\/\">Keystone pipeline<\/a>, it is not relevant to [it],\u201d he told StateImpact Texas. He said that the Denbury decision has to do with the issue of private vs. public use, and that Keystone XL &#8220;is clearly a pipeline that will have multiple users, making it public and qualifying it for eminent domain under Texas law.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>In an earlier comment to StateImpact Texas, TransCanada, who will own and operate the Keystone XL, said that\u00a0the pipeline will be available &#8220;for hire&#8221; to any company that wishes to use it, &#8220;as long as the product meets specs.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Warr, who represents the landowner side of the dispute, says it isn&#8217;t clear whether the ruling applies to pipelines other than those for natural gas. &#8220;It left the issue hanging,&#8221; she told StateImpact Texas, &#8220;to be decided another day, possibly by a court or by legislature.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>As for the farmer battling the pipeline, Julia Trigg Crawford, she intends to continue fighting her case. In late April she sees TransCanada in court, despite <a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/02\/24\/farmer-loses-restraining-order-against-keystone-xl-pipeline\/\">losing a restraining order against the company last week<\/a>. \u201cThe burden of proof is now on the pipeline after Denbury,\u201d she told StateImpact Texas recently. \u201cThat\u2019s the one glimmering light in Texas law right now that gives any power to us.\u201d Days after she lost her restraining order, TransCanada <a href=\"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/2012\/02\/27\/the-keystone-xl-pipeline-is-coming-to-texas\/\">announced they intended to start construction this yea<\/a>r on a section of the Keystone XL pipeline from Cushing, Oklahoma to refineries in Port Arthur, Texas.<\/p>\n<p>Read the full opinion by the Texas Supreme Court from today here:<\/p>\n<div class=\"embed-documentcloud\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><div class=\"DC-embed DC-embed-document DV-container\"> <div style=\"position:relative;padding-bottom:129.4444444444444%;height:0;overflow:hidden;max-width:100%;\"> <iframe src=\"\/\/www.documentcloud.org\/documents\/322204-090901rh.html?embed=true&amp;responsive=false&amp;sidebar=false\" title=\"090901rh (Hosted by DocumentCloud)\" sandbox=\"allow-scripts allow-same-origin allow-popups allow-forms\" frameborder=\"0\" style=\"position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;border:1px solid #aaa;border-bottom:0;box-sizing:border-box;\"><\/iframe> <\/div> <\/div><\/div>\n<h5>*This sentence originally stated a &#8220;natural gas&#8221; pipeline, which is incorrect. It is a CO2 pipeline. We regret the error.<\/h5>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Dave Fehling of StateImpact Texas contributed reporting to this article. The Texas Supreme Court sure is busy as of late. Today they released an updated opinion in the\u00a0Texas Rice Land Partners v. Denbury Green Pipeline-Texas case that could have big implications for the oil and gas industry and private landowners in Texas. The bottom line [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":50,"featured_media":6202,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[60],"tags":[73,22,21],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6973"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/50"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6973"}],"version-history":[{"count":26,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6973\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7138,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6973\/revisions\/7138"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6202"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6973"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6973"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/texas\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6973"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}