49 U.S.C. § 10905
Offering abandoned rail properties for sale for public purposes
When the Board approves an application to abandon or discontinue under section 10903, the Board shall find whether the rail properties that are involved in the proposed abandonment or discontinuance are appropriate for use for public purposes, including highways, other forms of mass transportation, conservation, energy production or transmission, or recreation. If the Board finds that the rail properties proposed to be abandoned are appropriate for public purposes and not required for continued rail operations, the properties may be sold, leased, exchanged, or otherwise disposed of only under conditions provided in the order of the Board. The conditions may include a prohibition on any such disposal for a period of not more than 180 days after the effective date of the order, unless the properties have first been offered, on reasonable terms, for sale for public purposes.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 74
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: Chevy Chase Land Co. v. United States, 733 A.2d 1055 (Md. 1999).
Chevy Chase Land Co. v. United States, 733 A.2d 1055 (Md. 1999). “Under 49 U.S.C. § 10905 , a railroad may not abandon its line immediately on the date which the ICC determines that public convenience and necessity permit abandonment.”
Hayfield N. R.R. v. Chicago & North W. Transp. Co., 467 U.S. 622 (1984). “See 49 U. S. C. § 10905 (c). 3 When the parties could not agree on mutually acceptable terms, the Commission, at the request of the Shippers Group, determined the appropriate price for subsidizing continued operation of the line.”
Napa Valley Wine Train, Inc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 787 P.2d 976 (Cal. 1990). “( 49 U.S.C. § 10905 (e).) [4] Acting under this statute the ICC dismissed SP's application to abandon and approved Wine Train's offer.”
Jack O. Black v. Interstate Com. Comm'n & United States of Am., 762 F.2d 106 (D.C. Cir. 1985). “6 Then, soon after the Commission’s November 4, 1982 re-approval of N & W’s abandonment application, IHR — on November 12,1982 — made an offer to purchase the Rushville line pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 10905 (c) (1982). See Petitioner’s Brief at 14a.”
Baros v. Texas Mexican Ry. Co., 400 F.3d 228 (5th Cir. 2005). “See 49 U.S.C. § 10905 ; 49 C.F.R. § 1152.28 (a)(1).”
Preseault v. United States, 27 Fed. Cl. 69 (Fed. Cl. 1992). “If it finds such an offer has been made, the ICC is to postpone issuance of the certificate for “a reasonable time, not to exceed six months” to permit the negotiation of financial assistance or purchase and sale agreement between the railroad and the prospective subsidizer.…”
Barclay v. United States, 443 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2006). “C The Barclay appellants also insist that the Meadowlark Trail NITU did not block their reversionary interest because, unlike the NITU at issue in Caldwell, it contained a 180-day public use condition issued pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 10905 . The public use condition requires…”
Iowa Terminal R.R. Co. v. Interstate Com. Comm'n & United States of Am., Iowa Traction R.R. Co., Intervenor, 853 F.2d 965 (D.C. Cir. 1988). “49 U.S.C. § 10905 (c). If the ICC finds that an offer is bona fide and the offeror financially responsible, it must suspend its permission to abandon in order to allow the parties to negotiate a sale.”
Glosemeyer v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co., 685 F. Supp. 1108 (E.D. Mo. 1988). “Under 49 U.S.C. § 10905 , and whenever the ICC finds that the public convenience and necessity require or permit abandonment or discontinuance of a particular railroad line, the ICC must publish its finding in the Federal Register so as to afford a person who wishes to prevent…”
Friends of the Atglen-Susquehanna Trail, Inc. v. Surface Transp. Bd. & United States of Am., 252 F.3d 246 (3rd Cir. 2001). “See 49 U.S.C. § 10905 ; 2 49 C.F.R. § 1152.28 (a)(1).”
Preseault v. Interstate Com. Comm'n, 494 U.S. 1 (1990). “49 U. S. C. §§ 10905 (f)(4), 10906 (1982 ed.”
Chicago & North W. Transp. Co. v. United States of Am. & Interstate Com. Comm'n, 678 F.2d 665 (7th Cir. 1982). “This case of first impression under the 1980 Staggers Rail Act amendments to 49 U.S.C. § 10905 requires us to decide both statutory and constitutional questions relating to the meaning of the term “fair market value” applied to an abandoned railroad line.”
— 49 U.S.C. § 10905(d) — 1 case
Minsi Rail Corp. v. United States, 638 F. Supp. 1346 (Regl. Rail Reorg. Act 1986).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.