Property Keyed to Saxer
Glosemeyer v. United States
The Glosemeyers (Plaintiffs) own parcels of land over which the Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Company (MKT) had an easement to operate its railroad line. Under Missouri law, once an easement is abandoned, the right to the property reverts to the owner of the underlying land. However, where the easement concerns a railroad right-of-way, the Rails to Trails Act (Act) supersedes state laws governing abandonment. Under the Act, the railroad company must seek permission from the federal government to abandon the track. If the application is approved, a qualified trail provider may apply to use the abandoned right-of-way as a recreational trail, provided that the Government (Defendant) is allowed to reopen rail service on the right-of-way if later deemed appropriate. The right-of-way is then placed in a national “rail bank,” in case it is later needed for rail service. This preservation of abandoned railroad easements for possible future railroad use is known as railbanking. In 1986, pursuant to the Act, MKT filed an application to abandon its rail service. The application was granted and MKT entered an agreement with the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), under which MKT transferred its interest in the right-of-way to MDNR for $200,000 and removed the entire track. MDNR now operates a recreational trail over the former line. Plaintiffs sued, arguing that, but for the Act, ownership of the easement area would have reverted back to them upon abandonment by MKT. Plaintiffs claimed that operation of the Act constituted a taking of a new easement on their property. Both parties moved for summary judgment as to liability.
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
Parties:Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
Procedural Posture & History:Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
Rule of Law:Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
Facts:What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.
Issue(s):Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
Holding:Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
Reasoning and Analysis:Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.