The United States Court of Federal Claims has ruled in favor of a group of landowners in Greensboro, North Carolina, awarding them $8,914,102 in compensation for property taken to create a public recreational trail. This decision, made on June 10, 2026, affects the landowners whose properties were adjacent to a 3.1-mile railroad corridor converted for trail use. The ruling highlights the ongoing legal disputes surrounding the government’s use of private land for public projects, particularly under the National Trails System Act.
The case, Agapion v. United States (Docket No. 19-1596), is part of a larger trend of “rails-to-trails” litigation in which landowners seek compensation after their land is repurposed for public recreational use. The court's decision is significant as it establishes the amount of just compensation owed to the plaintiffs, setting a precedent for similar cases in the future.
Background
The plaintiffs in this case, led by Basil Agapion, represent a group of 20 landowners who owned parcels of land adjacent to the former railroad corridor operated by Norfolk Southern Railway Company. The corridor, which runs between Milepost CF-65.6 and Milepost CF-68.7, was converted into a recreational trail after Norfolk Southern decided to abandon the rail line. The landowners argued that the conversion of the railroad corridor into a trail effectively took their property without just compensation, violating the Fifth Amendment.
The legal dispute arose under the National Trails System Act, which allows the government to convert abandoned railroad corridors into public trails. This act includes provisions that prevent state property laws from taking effect upon abandonment, thereby preserving the federal government's interest in the land. The plaintiffs contended that they were entitled to compensation for the loss of their property rights, specifically their reversionary rights once the railroad abandoned the easement.
The case reached the Court of Federal Claims after the plaintiffs filed their complaints between 2020 and 2023. The court had previously determined that the government was liable for the taking, and the trial focused solely on the amount of compensation owed to the landowners.
The Ruling
The court ruled that the plaintiffs were entitled to $8,914,102 in just compensation for the taking of their property. Judge Loren A. Smith presided over the case and concluded that the plaintiffs had established their right to compensation due to the government’s actions. The court stated, "The government’s actions in issuing the Notice of Interim Trail Use effectively precluded the landowners from asserting their state law reversionary rights, thus constituting a taking under the Fifth Amendment."
The court's decision was based on detailed findings of fact regarding the value of the properties affected by the trail use easement. The plaintiffs had initially sought $10,747,334 in compensation, including damages for delays, attorneys’ fees, and litigation expenses. However, the court ultimately determined a lower amount based on the evidence presented during the trial.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for landowners and government agencies involved in similar rails-to-trails conversions. It reinforces the principle that landowners are entitled to just compensation when their property rights are diminished or taken for public use. The court's decision clarifies the standards for determining compensation in such cases, emphasizing the importance of fair market value and the highest and best use of the property.
The ruling may also encourage other landowners affected by similar government actions to seek compensation, potentially leading to an increase in litigation surrounding rails-to-trails conversions. The outcome of this case could influence future negotiations and agreements between railroads, local governments, and landowners regarding the use of abandoned rail corridors.
What's Next
The government has the option to appeal the ruling, although details regarding any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. Additionally, there are other related cases pending that involve similar claims from landowners affected by the conversion of railroad corridors into public trails. The outcomes of these cases may further shape the legal landscape surrounding property rights and government takings in the context of recreational trail development.