Roanoke, VA — In a unanimous decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, a Virginia family’s right to fair compensation was upheld, restoring a $523,327 jury verdict. The court’s decision countered a lower court that had reduced the Terry family’s compensation by half in a dispute over land taken for a pipeline project.
The involved property, an 8.37-acre tract in Roanoke County, Virginia, was appropriated by Mountain Valley Pipeline LLC under the provisions of the Natural Gas Act for the construction of a natural gas conduit stretching from West Virginia to Virginia. The family initially received a favorable judgment in the amount of over $500,000 for the compulsory acquisition of their land. However, this amount was subsequently halved by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia.
Judge Stephanie D. Thacker, writing on behalf of the Fourth Circuit, emphasized that the restored award was supported by credible testimonies without the need to conflate varying land use valuations—a concern that prompted the district court’s initial reduction of the jury’s verdict. Judges Roger L. Gregory and James Andrew Wynn concurred with Thacker’s judgment, rejecting the earlier $261,033 decision issued by U.S. District Judge Elizabeth Kay Dillon.
Norman A. Thomas, representing the Terry family on appeal, praised the reinstatement, highlighting its adherence to jury-determined compensation based on recorded and credible evidences. He underscored the decision’s broader implications for future eminent domain cases, especially those enacted under the Natural Gas Act.
“The Fourth Circuit’s decision underscores the crucial role of jury trials in determining just compensations in eminent domain cases,” Thomas commented in a statement published on Monday. He outlined expectations that the ruling would instruct district court judges on ensuring due process for landowners confronted with property seizures.
Arguing on behalf of Mountain Valley Pipeline, Wade W. Massie presented the company’s case, which held that the reduced judgment by the district court was apt given the circumstances of the land valuation.
A spokesperson for Equitrans Midstream Corp., Natalie A. Cox, expressed a commitment to swiftly resolving the ongoing dispute, despite the company’s belief in the appropriateness of the district judge’s decision. “We respect the judicial process and look forward to reaching a definitive conclusion in this case,” Cox stated on Monday.
This ruling arrives amidst ongoing discussions and legal debates over property rights and compensatory standards in cases of land appropriation for infrastructural purposes. Legal experts suggest that the Fourth Circuit’s firm stance on adhering to jury verdicts could influence future jurisprudence relating to eminent domain and compensation fairness.