• About
    • Justin Hodge
    • Luke Ellis
  • Contact Us
  • Eminent Domain FAQs
  • Resources
    • Fair Market Value Considerations
    • Highest and Best Use
    • Highway Expansions
    • Pipelines
    • Power Lines
    • Water Rights
    • What is Eminent Domain?
  • Sitemap
  • Thank You

Texas Condemnation

~ Texas Eminent Domain Explained

Texas Condemnation

Category Archives: Pipelines

Luke Ellis and Justin Hodge (Program Co-Chair) – Faculty at Houston Eminent Domain Conference

09 Wednesday May 2018

Posted by texascondemnation in Houston, Houston eminent domain, Pipelines, Politics, Property Rights, texas condemnation, texas condemnation lawyer, texas eminent domain, Texas Eminent Domain Attorney, Texas Eminent Domain Lawyer

≈ Leave a comment

Luke Ellis and Justin Hodge (Program Co-Chair), Marrs Ellis & Hodge LLP, are both faculty at the upcoming Houston, Texas Eminent Domain: CLE International Conference on Thursday, May 10, 2018 and Friday, May 11, 2018.  Luke will be speaking on Thursday at 10:00 am on Texas Eminent Domain Legislative Reform Efforts and Justin will be speaking as part of a panel on Friday at 10:15 am on the Legal Impacts of Hurricane Harvey.   The full conference schedule can be found here.  We hope you can join us at the conference.

Screen Shot 2018-05-09 at 11.15.20 AM

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Like this:

Like Loading…

Oil Pipeline Ruptures – Landowners Evacuate

21 Friday Jul 2017

Posted by texascondemnation in Pipelines, Property Rights, texas condemnation, texas condemnation lawyer, texas eminent domain, Texas Eminent Domain Attorney, Texas Eminent Domain Lawyer, Texas Railroad Commission, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Bastrop County, Condemnation, Crane, Crude Oil, Diesel, Eminent Domain, Evacuation, Houston, Longhorn, Magellan, oil and gas, pipeline, Rupture, Spill, Takings

The Longhorn pipeline, a crude oil pipeline operated by Magellan Midstream Partners (“Magellan”), ruptured approximately 4 miles southwest of Bastrop, Texas on July 13, 2017. The pipeline transports crude oil from Crane, Texas to Houston, Texas, a distance of roughly 500 miles. A contractor was performing maintenance on the pipeline, which was operating when it ruptured. As a result, an estimated 1,200 barrels (50,400 gallons) of crude oil spilled into the surrounding area.

Residents within a 1-mile radius of the rupture were asked to evacuate while residents within a 2-mile radius were given the option to either evacuate or take shelter in their homes. FM 520, the nearby thoroughfare, was shut down in both directions.

When it ruptured, the Longhorn pipeline was running at or near its full capacity. The Longhorn pipeline is a large capacity pipeline capable of transporting upwards of 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day. A prolonged shutdown could potentially mean that suppliers would have to look elsewhere to get their crude oil transported to the Gulf Coast.

This is not the first spill involving a Magellan operated pipeline. In January, a pipeline transporting diesel fuel spilled roughly 45,000 gallons of diesel in Northern Iowa.

A significant portion of property takings in Texas are the result of oil and gas pipeline projects. Incidents such as this serve as a reminder that even after condemnation proceedings have concluded, pipelines can still carry risks and create health and safety concerns. Due to the hazardous nature of the products pipelines transport, the potential for accidents poses an enduring threat to crops, livestock, water supplies, and property values. Landowners would do well to keep these considerations in mind when approached by oil and gas companies seeking to obtain an easement across their land.

Written by Graham Taylor

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Like this:

Like Loading…

Legislature Bails Out Railroad Commission- Helps Landowners

07 Friday Jul 2017

Posted by texascondemnation in Pipelines, texas condemnation, texas eminent domain, Texas Eminent Domain Attorney, Texas Eminent Domain Lawyer, Texas Railroad Commission, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

budget increase, Condemnation, Constitution, Eminent Domain, landowner rights, pipeline, pipeline data, Pipelines, power of eminent domain, Texas Constitution, Texas Legislature, Texas Railroad Commission, TRC, United States Constitution

The Texas Railroad Commission (“TRC”), an agency that has suffered financial difficulties due to budget cuts and reduced revenues, recently received a budget increase of 46 percent ($79.6 million) in the recently ended legislative session. These budgetary increases will hopefully allow the TRC to improve upon their ability to be an effective resource for landowners and make pipeline data readily available to the everyday Texan. Pipeline construction often requires pipeline companies to use the power of eminent domain to condemn property, commonly referred to as a “taking.” Public access to information collected by the TRC is vital to keeping landowners aware of activities that could affect their property.

The budget increase follows a year that saw monthly budget cuts of over a million dollars, a hiring freeze, and the postponing of desperately needed technological updates. In light of these financial difficulties, the TRC was forced to limit their operations to two core functions, the permitting and inspection of wells. Another one of the TRC’s functions is the issuance of T-4 permits which grants pipeline constructors the common carrier status required to exercise the power of eminent domain. A vital component of fulfilling this function is to maintain a public database of pipeline easements in the State of Texas.

The increased funding is intended, in part, to improve programs for well plugging, oil field clean up, and pipeline safety by financing the hiring of additional staff. The TRC’s staff is capped at 827 employees. Presently, the TRC is roughly 150 employees short of that maximum number. Additionally, the TRC was granted one-time authorization to retain nearly $40 million in revenue collected through its administration of the Natural Gas Utility Pipeline Tax. Roughly $27.6 million of that money will also be used to hire additional employees. The remainder will be used to provide salary increases.

An additional purpose of the budget increase is to continue, and hopefully expedite, the drawn-out process of updating the TRC’s computers and digitizing decades of oil and gas records which include pipelines constructed with and without the power of eminent-domain in the State.

In addition to updating its computer systems and digitizing historical records, the TRC provides an interactive map, accessible to the public, that tracks existing and operational pipelines throughout the State. The data represented by the interactive map may not always be current. This ambiguity diminishes the capacity of Texans to appreciate the scope of pipeline activity and its effect on their lives and property. One day, perhaps, the TRC will expand the functionality of its interactive map to include planned pipelines. This would allow landowners to determine whether a project under development will impact their property.

Landowners, under both the U.S. and Texas Constitutions, are entitled to just compensation when their land is taken. These database improvements can help begin to level the playing field between landowners and powerful oil and gas interests by keeping landowners current on projects that could impact their property rights.

– Co-Authored by Graham Taylor and Justin Hodge

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Like this:

Like Loading…

‪Vote to support to end #eminentdomain ‬for private gain. YES on SB 740 @loiskolkhorst

18 Tuesday Apr 2017

Posted by texascondemnation in common-carrier status, Denbury, Pipelines, Politics, SB 747, texas condemnation, texas condemnation lawyer, texas eminent domain, Texas Eminent Domain Attorney, Texas Eminent Domain Lawyer, Texas Transportation Commission

≈ Leave a comment

‪Vote to support to end #eminentdomain ‬for private gain. YES on SB 740 @loiskolkhorst

Please watch the “‘TRANS PECOS’ | TEASER” on Vimeo.

 

The website for “TRANS PECOS” can be viewed here.

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Like this:

Like Loading…

Kinder Morgan Pipeline Explosion in Refugio Texas

17 Friday Feb 2017

Posted by texascondemnation in Pipelines, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

explosion, kinder morgan, kinder morgan explosion, kinder morgan pipeline, pipeline leak

At approximately 1:00 am on Wednesday morning, a Kinder Morgan pipeline exploded in Refugio Texas. The explosion produced a fireball stretching 200 feet into the night sky, illuminating the area. Though there were no injuries, the blast was felt and heard as far as 60 miles away, and woke residents in the area.

Incidents like these highlight the latent danger that landowners are exposed to when pipelines are constructed on their property.

The entire video can be found here.

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Like this:

Like Loading…

Texas Supreme Court Pipeline Ruling Sets back Texas Land Owner Rights

03 Friday Feb 2017

Posted by texascondemnation in common-carrier status, Denbury, Environmental Permitting, Landowner Rights, Pipelines, Politics, Property Rights, Supreme Court, texas condemnation, texas condemnation lawyer, texas eminent domain, Texas Eminent Domain Attorney, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Appellate Court, Common Carrier, Common Carrier Test, common-carrier status, Denbury, Denbury Green Pipeline, landowner rights, Landowners, Opinion, politics, property rights, Public Benefit, Public Use, supreme court of texas, Texas, texas property rights, Texas Rice Land Partners, Third Party Contract

According to the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 17 of the Texas Constitution, applications of the eminent-domain power must be for public use. Jurisdictions have developed legal and administrative structures which allow private interests limited uses of the power. For Texas pipelines, the granting of eminent-domain authority can only take place when a project fulfills certain requirements. Chief among these is the ability to prove that the pipeline has a public use, meaning it is not being built exclusively for and used only by the entity condemning the land. Statewide, the common-carrier definition, and the derivative test determining whether the definition can describe a given pipeline, is used to establish and enforce the public use requirement.

In the recently decided Denbury Green Pipeline – Texas, LLC v. Texas Rice Land Partners, Ltd., the Texas Supreme Court clarified the access conditions for common-carrier status. In 2015, an appellate court established two additional barriers to common-carrier status. First, it held that a pipeline’s common carrier status must result from an examination of the intent of the constructing party to use the pipeline for public benefit at the onset of the project’s contemplation. Second, the pipeline’s use must serve a “substantial” public interest. The Supreme Court decision reversed these two holdings, the first on the grounds that it misinterpreted case law, and the second because it proceeded beyond the limits of precedent. The Supreme Court also held that Denbury’s post-construction product transportation contracts with third parties, and the fact that certain third parties would retain product title, was sufficient to evidence public use and therefore common-carrier status after the pipeline is built. This opinion is a significant blow to Texas landowner rights.

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Like this:

Like Loading…

The Fight Continues for Big Bend Landowners Facing Eminent Domain

17 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by texascondemnation in Pipelines, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Big Bend, Big Bend Conservation Alliance, Big Bend Landowners, Eminent Domain, pipeline, Texas Observer

Despite a handful of recent victories, regional landowners continue to face an uphill battle.

Please click here to read the Texas Observer’s coverage of this issue.

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Like this:

Like Loading…

Transfer of Pipeline Easements Cannot Be For Private Use

10 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by texascondemnation in Pipelines, texas condemnation, texas eminent domain, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Allen v. Enbridge, Aycock v. Houston Lighting and Power Co., Cantu v. Cent. Power & Light co., Condemnation, Eminent Domain, pipeline, pipeline easements, Private Benefit, private use, Proposed Easement Agreement, Texas Utilities Code, Tyler Court of Appeals

In Allen v. Enbridge G & P, L.P., Enbridge G & P brought condemnation action against the Allens for the purpose of securing two easements, one permanent and one temporary, from the landowners. Enbridge required the easements for the installation and maintenance of a pipeline which would carry natural gas products. A permanent easement of 50 feet in width would contain the pipeline and a 25-foot easement would be used as a temporary workspace. At the special commissioners’ hearing, Enbridge was awarded the easements. Mr. and Mrs. Allen filed objections, and the proceeding was brought to the trial court.

On appeal, Mr. and Mrs. Allen brought two issues, the second of which concerned the ability of the easement holder both to maintain the benefits and burdens of the Plaintiff and Defendants, and allow an assignee to do likewise. Paragraph X of Enbridge’s Second Amended Petition contained the following:

“The benefits and burdens of this Permanent Easement shall be binding upon and shall ensure to the benefit of Plaintiff and Defendants, and to their respective successors and assigns.”

Mr. and Mrs. Allen argued that this language allowed Enbridge to assign the property for private use, rather than strictly public use, and was therefore in violation of the constitutional prohibition against private use takings. The Tyler Court of Appeals found that though “certain easements may be assigned to a third party, that third party’s use cannot exceed the rights expressly conveyed to the original easement holder.” Cantu v. Cent. Power & Light co. It also found that “companies possessing the right to condemn private property for a public use cannot do what they please with the land condemned, but only what is reasonably necessary to carry out the purpose for which the land is taken,” and that “anything beyond this is not the taking of private property for public use, but the taking of private property for private use.” Aycock v. Houston Lighting and Power Co.

Because the language in the Second Amended Petition permitted Enbridge to assign the easement without restriction, the Court of Appeals modified the trial court’s final judgment by restricting the easement’s assignment only to an assignee that qualifies as a transporter of natural gas as defined in Texas Utilities Code, Section 121.001(a).”

In summary, landowners should diligently look at the language of the pipeline company’s proposed easement to make sure it cannot be transferred for a private benefit.

To view the case, click here.

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Like this:

Like Loading…

New RRC Rules Require Pipeline Companies to Do More than Simply Check a Box

13 Friday Mar 2015

Posted by texascondemnation in Pipelines, Politics, Property Rights, texas condemnation, texas condemnation lawyer, texas eminent domain

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Attorneys, Austin, Austin condemnation, Austin eminent domain lawyer, Blog, Condemnation, Condemnation claims, Eminent Domain, Houston condemnation, RRC, Texas, texas eminent domain, Texas eminent domain lawyer, Texas Railroad Commission, Texas Supreme Court

The Texas Railroad Commission’s (RRC) new pipeline permitting rules that require oil companies to verify their common-carrier status went into effect last week, marking a significant move away from the previous rules that simply required companies to check a box to claim common-carrier status.

The RRC has maintained that its T-4 permit only allows a company to operate a pipeline and does not automatically entrust the company with the power of eminent domain. The limit of this power, the RRC says, remains with the court as it always has.

The new rules will require up-front proof of common-carrier status. Pipeline companies previously only offered proof that they carried unaffiliated third-party product if and when its common-carrier status was challenged.

This rule change comes after the landmark 2012 case in which the Texas Supreme Court ruled that a pipeline company must do more than show its T-4 permit as proof of its common-carrier status. (Texas Rice Land Partners, Ltd. v. Denbury Green-Texas, LLC, 363 S.W.3d 192 (Tex. 2012)).

If you have any questions about the new rules or anything related to eminent domain, please feel free to contact Justin Hodge (jhodge@jmehlaw.com).

Coauthored by Justin Hodge and Ayla Syed.

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Like this:

Like Loading…

Denbury Tug-of-War Continues

23 Friday Jan 2015

Posted by texascondemnation in Chambers County, Denbury, Fort Bend County, Harris County, Jefferson County, JMEH Law News, Pipelines, Power Lines, Property Rights, texas condemnation, texas condemnation lawyer, texas eminent domain

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

172nd District Court, common-carrier status, Condemnation, denbury green, Denbury Green Pipeline, Eminent Domain, Justin Hodge, Ninth District Court of Appeals, RRC, T-4 Permit, Texas Railroad Commission, Texas Rice Partners

Denbury Green Pipeline

The 120-mile “Green” Pipeline, completed in 2010, runs from Donaldsonville, Louisiana to Houston, Texas.

Despite the drop in oil prices, the tug-of-war between landowners and the Denbury Green pipeline company continues to play out in court in the landmark case that defined common-carrier status in Texas.

Texas Rice Partners, Ltd. v. Denbury Green Pipeline, involving Denbury’s right to invoke eminent domain to obtain the properties of Texas Rice Land Partners, Ltd., a consortium of rice farmers, was ruled in the pipeline company’s favor by both the 172nd District Court and the Texas Ninth District Court of Appeals in Beaumont, Texas, in 2011. These courts claimed that Denbury was indeed a common carrier, and, therefore, could use eminent domain to obtain land to build its pipeline.

The Texas Supreme Court, however, reversed those rulings, arguing that Denbury’s classification as a common carrier rested too heavily on a pipeline company simply checking a box on a one-page document for the Texas Railroad Commission (RRC) and that the RRC’s findings could not reliably and conclusively determine a company’s power to use eminent domain.

The Supreme Court remanded the case back to the district court late 2011, and the district court again ruled in favor of Denbury’s common carrier status in 2014. The case continued again to the appellate court in Beaumont, which heard oral arguments for the case last month. Denbury built the pipeline during this legal back-and-forth, but the landowners hope the appellate court will send the case back to the Supreme Court as the case has yet to be heard by a jury and that Denbury’s intent to serve as a common carrier at the time of condemnation has not been established (Read more here).

While the court of appeals has not yet ruled on this matter, the RRC announced new regulations for granting a T-4 permit – required for property condemnation by pipeline companies – effective March 2015 in an effort to better regulate this process. The new regulations will ask for more substantial information and supporting documentation from companies applying for the permit and enforce a new timeline for the application process (Read more about the new regulations here).

As laws and precedent for private companies to invoke eminent domain continue to change, landowners should try to stay up-to-date to better protect their property rights. In fact, we all should. The laws are changing quickly, and the tug-of-war between pipeline companies and landowners will impact us all.

Justin Hodge is a law partner in Houston, Texas. He focuses on eminent domain, condemnation and landowner defense. For more information, please see http://www.jmehlaw.com.  

Coauthored by Justin Hodge and Ayla Syed.

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Like this:

Like Loading…
← Older posts

Stay up to date with Justin and Luke

texascondemnation

texascondemnation

Luke Ellis and Justin Hodge are partners with Marrs Ellis & Hodge LLP. Justin heads the firm's eminent domain practice in the Houston office. Luke heads the firm's eminent domain practice in the Austin office. Luke Ellis is widely recognized as one of Texas’s top young lawyers—and one of the top lawyers of any age practicing in the area of eminent domain. Mr. Ellis has broad experience and has enjoyed success in many types of civil litigation. Justin Hodge is a trial lawyer who represents Texas landowners in condemnation, eminent-domain, and real-estate lawsuits. He represents landowners in condemnation proceedings, not the governmental authorities or private companies taking property. Mr. Hodge has handled complex condemnation and eminent-domain cases throughout the State of Texas. If you have questions about any of the issues raised in this blog, we invite you to discuss them with us at jhodge@mehlaw.com or lellis@mehlaw.com.

View Full Profile →

RSS TexasCondemnation

  • Justin Hodge, Kyle Baum, and Hannah Sliva Speak at No East Loop BBQ Social in Bryan, Texas April 15, 2025
    Last week, Justin Hodge, Kyle Baum, and Hannah Sliva had the privilege of speaking at the April No East Loop …Continue reading →
    clshouston
  • Justin Hodge Interviewed Regarding the Trident Intrastate Pipeline Project on Houston Matters February 10, 2025
    Justin Hodge, Marrs Ellis & Hodge LLP partner, was interviewed on Houston Matters with Craig Cohen regarding the upcoming Kinder …Continue reading →
    clshouston
  • Kyle Baum Interviewed by  CBS7 News Regarding the DeLa Express Pipeline, Raising Eminent Domain Concerns October 9, 2024
    Kyle Baum, Marrs Ellis & Hodge LLP partner, was interviewed on CBS7 news regarding the upcoming DeLa Express Pipeline project …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Justin Hodge Interviewed on Silberman Law Firm’s Weekly Docket Podcast re: Eminent Domain March 7, 2024
    Marrs Ellis & Hodge LLP partner, Justin Hodge, was interviewed on Silberman Law Firm’s Weekly Docket Podcast. You can listen …Continue reading →
    clshouston
  • Jacob Merkord on Fox 7 Austin News Regarding Matterhorn Pipeline in Williamson County, Texas August 3, 2022
    Jacob Merkord, Marrs Ellis & Hodge LLP partner, was interviewed on Fox 7 Austin news regarding the upcoming Matterhorn Pipeline …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Luke Ellis Interviewed on KXAN-NBC News Austin Regarding Matterhorn Pipeline Project July 13, 2022
    Luke Ellis, Marrs Ellis & Hodge LLP partner, was interviewed on KXAN-NBC news in Austin regarding the upcoming Matterhorn pipeline …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Watch Justin Hodge on Fox26 News – Texas Supreme Court Approves Eminent Domain for High Speed Train Between Houston and Dallas June 30, 2022
    Justin Hodge was interviewed on Fox26 news about the Texas Supreme Court’s recent approval of eminent domain for the high …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • ALI CLE Eminent Domain Conference – Scottsdale, Arizona January 28, 2022
    Justin Hodge with Marrs Ellis and Hodge presented at the 2022 ALI CLE Eminent Domain Conference in Scottsdale, Arizona. You …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Brazoria County Bar Association – Eminent Domain Presentation January 20, 2022
    Justin Hodge, Kyle Baum, and Kyle Hlavinka presented on eminent domain at the January 2022 Brazoria County Bar Association luncheon. …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation
  • Oral Arguments Held in Tropical Storm Harvey Downstream Flooding Cases January 13, 2022
    On January 12, 2022, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard Milton v. United States (The Tropical Storm …Continue reading →
    texascondemnation

Follow Our Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Twitter Updates

Tweets by JMEHCondemn

Twitter Updates

Tweets by TXCondemnation

Twitter Updates

Tweets by JMEHLaw

TexasCondemnation

  • RSS - Posts
  • RSS - Comments

Pages

  • About
    • Justin Hodge
    • Luke Ellis
  • Contact Us
  • Eminent Domain FAQs
  • Resources
    • Fair Market Value Considerations
    • Highest and Best Use
    • Highway Expansions
    • Pipelines
    • Power Lines
    • Water Rights
    • What is Eminent Domain?
  • Sitemap
  • Thank You

Powered by WordPress.com.

Loading Comments...

    %d