ABOUT

Clark Hill is an international team of legal advisors focused on delivering exceptional growth for your business. With locations spanning across the United States, Ireland, and Mexico, we work in agile, collaborative teams, partnering with our clients to help them reach and exceed their business goals. For more information, please visit clarkhill.com

 

 

 

 

Login

 

CONTACT

Stephon B. Bagne

Member, Clark Hill PLC

Phone: (313) 965-8897

Fax: (313) 309-6897

Email: sbagne@clarkhill.com

 

Stephon B. Bagne’s expertise in representing property owners in condemnation cases is widely recognized. Stephon has represented all types of property owners in a variety of situations including vacant and improved property, partial and total takings, easement and fee acquisitions, involving commercial and residential properties. He has won jury trials in courts throughout the State of Michigan and successfully defended those verdicts before the Michigan Court of Appeals. Stephon has prevailed in challenges of the necessity of takings and negotiated less onerous acquisitions in partial taking matters. He regularly speaks and writes about eminent domain and other real estate law issues for a variety of professional organizations. For a more complete bio, please click here.

 

 

 

 

« MICHIGAN BUSINESS LEADERS RALLY TO SEEK DECOMMISSION OF ENBRIDGE LINE 5 | Main | MDOT FILES NEW BRIDGE CONDEMNATIONS »
Tuesday
Jan102017

WOLVERINE PIPELINE CAPITULATES IN RESPONSE TO NECESSITY CHALLENGE

In return for dropping a necessity challenge, Wolverine Pipeline agreed to substantially modified easement and paid the attorney fees incurred in pursuing the challenge.

As I have previously noted, greater flexibility exists when challenging pipeline condemnations than many other situations.  In addition, pipeline companies are notorious for attempting to secure rights in excess of what they need for the current project.  Wolverine’s current project is a perfect case in point.  In 1953, Wolverine acquired property rights allowing it to install multiple pipelines from unsuspecting owners – and decades later their successors in title paid the price when Wolverine jammed its current project down their proverbial throats and into their literal backyards. 

In the present set of cases, Wolverine requested property rights that are grossly in excess of what they were allowed to secure under the necessity standards that control under Michigan law.  For example, Wolverine sought the right to construct multiple pipelines, of unlimited size, transporting any substances they desire, and included the right to construct whatever above-ground improvements they desired.

I challenged necessity.  As a result, Wolverine dramatically re-wrote their easement to address these issues. In compliance with their statutory obligations pursuant to MCL 213.66(2), Wolverine paid tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees resulting from the challenge.  The case is proceeding as to just compensation.

If a pipeline company approaches you, it is critical to understand your rights both to restrict the property rights being acquired and to be paid just compensation.  This blog post provides a more expansive discussion of general pipeline taking issues. 

Please feel free to contact me if you are facing any eminent domain issues.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>