Summary
This Eighth Circuit opinion reviews a district court's grant of a preliminary injunction enjoining Billings County, North Dakota, from entering plaintiffs' property to construct a bridge via eminent domain. The appellate court held that the county could not legally contract away its sovereign power of eminent domain through a prior settlement agreement, rendering the plaintiffs' breach-of-contract claim unlikely to succeed on the merits. Consequently, the court vacated the preliminary injunction and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with this ruling.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Shorts demonstrated at least a fair chance of success on their breach-of-contract claim sufficient to support a preliminary injunction.
- Whether a governmental entity may lawfully contract away its sovereign power of eminent domain.
- Whether the district court abused its discretion by granting the preliminary injunction.
Holdings
- A governmental entity cannot permanently contract away its sovereign power of eminent domain; an agreement purporting to do so is contrary to law.
- The Shorts did not demonstrate even a fair chance of prevailing on their breach-of-contract claim because the Settlement Agreement's restriction on eminent-domain authority was unlawful.
- The district court abused its discretion by granting the preliminary injunction because the Shorts could not establish the likelihood-of-success factor.
Key quotations
“Put simply, the County could not contract away its power of eminent domain.” (at 1080)
“The power of eminent domain is an attribute of sovereignty, and inheres in every independent state.” (at 1079)
Factual background
The County initiated condemnation proceedings to acquire the Shorts' land for construction of the Little Missouri River Crossing. In 2021, the parties entered a Settlement Agreement under which the County agreed not to pursue eminent domain or other legal action to condemn the property for the project. In 2023, a newly elected Board of Commissioners revived the project, made a purchase and temporary-easement offer, and then used a quick-take condemnation procedure to obtain possession of the property. The Shorts sued for breach of the Settlement Agreement and obtained a preliminary injunction barring the County from entering the property.
Procedural history
The Shorts sued Billings County in federal court asserting breach of contract, promissory estoppel, and constitutional and statutory challenges to the County's condemnation of their land. The district court granted a preliminary injunction based on the Shorts' likelihood of success on their breach-of-contract claim, stayed the federal proceedings under the Colorado River doctrine, and denied the County's motion to dismiss without prejudice. The County appealed the grant of preliminary injunctive relief. While the appeal was pending, the state court determined that the Shorts' contract and promissory-estoppel claims were not part of the condemnation appeal and later granted the County summary judgment on whether the Settlement Agreement barred the condemnation.
Remand instructions
The preliminary injunction is vacated, and the matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.