Supreme Court Questions Fee Awards in Pipeline Eminent Domain Case
Supreme Court justices expressed skepticism about attorney fee awards in an eminent domain case involving a natural gas pipeline.
Why it matters: The decision will clarify whether state laws permitting attorney's fees apply in eminent domain disputes under the Natural Gas Act, affecting energy infrastructure projects and legal strategies.
- Oral arguments heard on November 9, 2026, in Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.
- Federal district court awarded $383,375.76 for attorney's fees under North Dakota law.
- Eighth Circuit reversed, ruling that the Natural Gas Act's silence means federal just compensation applies, excluding fees.
- Litigation over pipeline easements lasted about three years before property value was settled.
On November 9, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission, Inc., a significant case about attorney fee awards in eminent domain proceedings under the Natural Gas Act.
The dispute arose when WBI Energy Transmission sought easements for a natural gas pipeline across ranchland in McKenzie County, North Dakota, leading to three years of litigation over property value. While the parties settled the compensation, attorneys' fees remained contested.
Initially, a federal district court awarded $383,375.76 in attorney's fees to the landowners based on North Dakota law, which includes such fees as part of just compensation in eminent domain cases. However, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed this decision, holding that the Natural Gas Act does not specify compensation standards, so the federal Fifth Amendment's just compensation rules apply — typically excluding attorney's fees.
Attorneys questioned the scope of the remedy during oral arguments. Robert J. McNamara, representing the petitioners, noted, "The Natural Gas Act authorizes private companies to ask courts to order the forced sale of private property, but it says nothing about the substantive law those courts should use to determine what that property is worth." On the other hand, Paul W. Hughes, attorney for the respondent, emphasized the choice between a federal remedy or the state remedy in such eminent domain actions under pipeline projects.
The Court's decision will provide important clarification on the applicable standards for fee awards when private pipeline companies exercise eminent domain powers delegated by the federal government. Legal professionals in energy, real estate, and eminent domain law are closely monitoring the outcome, as it impacts compensation structures and litigation strategy in infrastructure disputes.
By the numbers:
- $383,375.76 — attorney's fees awarded by federal district court
- 3 years — duration of litigation over property value before settlement
- November 9, 2026 — date of Supreme Court oral arguments
What's next: The Supreme Court's final ruling is pending and will clarify whether state attorney fee laws or federal standards apply under the Natural Gas Act in eminent domain cases.