The National Association of REALTORS® (NAR), joined by the REALTORS® Land Institute (RLI) and the American Farm Bureau Federation, filed an amicus brief in Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission, a U.S. Supreme Court case that could significantly affect property owners’ rights when private companies exercise federally delegated eminent-domain authority.
The case stems from WBI Energy Transmission’s acquisition of easements across North Dakota ranchland for a natural gas pipeline authorized under the Natural Gas Act (NGA). After the landowners rejected WBI’s offer at substantially below market value and successfully obtained a higher valuation in court, they were awarded attorneys fees and litigation expenses under North Dakota law. The 8th Circuit reversed that award, holding that compensation in NGA condemnations is limited to the Fifth Amendment’s federal standard of “just compensation,” which generally excludes litigation costs and attorneys fees.
The Supreme Court agreed to review the case to resolve whether landowners subject to condemnation under the NGA may rely on state-law compensation protections or are limited to the federal constitutional standard of "just compensation." The issue has divided the federal courts, with the 8th Circuit departing from four other circuits that apply state compensation law when the NGA does not expressly address the issue.
In its brief, NAR argues that the 8th Circuit wrongly presumed that congressional silence overrides state property law. Because compensation and property rights have long been governed by the states, NAR contends that state-law protections should continue to apply unless Congress clearly says otherwise. The organizations warn that, if upheld, the decision could affect not only pipeline cases but other federal statutes that delegate eminent-domain authority without defining compensation standards.
NAR further argues that limiting compensation to the federal constitutional minimum would discourage landowners from challenging inadequate offers. Without reimbursement for attorneys fees and litigation expenses, many property owners may be forced to accept low offers rather than incur the costs of proving fair market value.
NAR’s legal advocacy efforts to support private property rights remain a priority. NAR will continue to monitor any developments in this case and provide updates accordingly.