Doyle v. Armstrong

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “the conversion to a trail is completely unrelated to the operation of a railway; therefore, trail use falls outside the scope of the right-of-way deeds and condemned easements”
• explaining that the issuance of the NITU is the only government action that operates to preempt abandonment
• applying Iowa law and finding that “when a landowner grants a railroad purposes easement, once the Railroad’s operations discontinue, the railroad purposes easement extinguishes.”
• “[T]he Government’s argument that it is only liable for taking of an easement for railroad purposes is misplaced_”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).