Background
In 1924, BNSF Railway Company’s predecessor acquired in fee simple a railroad right-of-way in Festus, Missouri. Tazl Development, LLC purchased neighboring land in 2013. A storage facility and chain-link fence on Tazl’s land encroached on part of the railroad right-of-way.
Tazl sued in 2023 to quiet title and obtain the disputed property by adverse possession. Its amended petition alleged that the railroad had abandoned the property because it had never been used or intended for railroad operations. BNSF sought judgment on the pleadings, arguing that the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act gives the federal Surface Transportation Board exclusive authority over railroad abandonment. The circuit court granted BNSF’s motion.
The Court’s Holding
The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that federal law preempted a state court from deciding Tazl’s abandonment theory while the Surface Transportation Board retained jurisdiction over the right-of-way. Because Tazl sought to permanently divest BNSF of railroad property and remove it from present or future rail transportation, the requested remedy implicated the board’s exclusive jurisdiction under the ICCTA.
The court also rejected Tazl’s alternative argument that the property was “disconnected” from any reasonable railroad use and therefore subject to adverse possession despite Missouri’s statutory protection for land devoted to public use. The Missouri Supreme Court decision on which Tazl relied had merely suggested such a theory in dicta, not adopted it as a holding. Tazl also had not alleged disconnection in its amended petition.
Key Takeaways
- A state-law remedy that would permanently remove part of a railroad right-of-way from present or future rail use implicates the Surface Transportation Board’s exclusive jurisdiction.
- Federal law preempts state-court determination of whether railroad property has been abandoned while the board retains jurisdiction over the right-of-way.
- Prior Missouri discussion suggesting that property disconnected from any reasonable railroad use might be adversely possessed was nonbinding dicta and could not sustain Tazl’s claim.
Why It Matters
The decision limits the ability of neighboring landowners to acquire railroad right-of-way through state adverse-possession litigation. Even property allegedly unused for decades cannot be treated as abandoned by a state court when doing so would interfere with the federal board’s authority over railroad property.
The opinion also cautions litigants that an alternative theory introduced in opposition to judgment on the pleadings cannot overcome both the allegations of the operative petition and the absence of binding precedent recognizing that theory.