Supreme Court to Rule on Pipeline Eminent Domain Valuation Standard
The outcome of Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission could determine whether private pipeline companies using federal condemnation authority must pay landowners market-rate compensation or may rely...
The Supreme Court agreed on June 29, 2025, to hear Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission, a case centered on whether a private natural gas pipeline company must pay constitutionally mandated "just compensation" under a standard independent of the company's own valuation methodology. The Court's docket entry for the case confirms the grant of certiorari. The dispute originated in McKenzie County, North Dakota, where WBI Energy Transmission invoked a federal certificate of public convenience and necessity issued under the Natural Gas Act to condemn easements across approximately 12 miles of land owned by Leonard and Denae Hoffmann in 2018, according to court filings in the underlying case in the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota.
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that private property shall not be taken for public use "without just compensation." The Natural Gas Act, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 717f, grants holders of federal pipeline certificates the power of eminent domain when state law does not provide an adequate remedy. The central legal question before the Court is the methodology used to calculate compensation owed to landowners when a federally certificated private company exercises that condemnation authority, according to the petition for certiorari filed with the Supreme Court.
The Hoffmanns challenged the compensation amount offered by WBI Energy, arguing that the company's appraisal methodology undervalued the easements. Lower court rulings in the case, accessible through PACER under the District of North Dakota docket, addressed the applicable valuation standard. The Supreme Court's agreement to hear the case places the dispute on its docket for a term that would yield a decision by June 2026 at the latest, based on standard Court scheduling practice.
The case has drawn attention from landowner-rights advocates and energy infrastructure industry groups, both of which have a financial stake in how the Court defines "just compensation" in the pipeline context. Amicus briefs filed or anticipated from such organizations would be publicly available through the Supreme Court's electronic filing system. A ruling broadly interpreted could affect pending and future pipeline condemnation proceedings across multiple states where natural gas infrastructure projects are underway, according to the Natural Gas Act's scope as defined in federal statute.
What remains unknown is the specific dollar difference between WBI Energy's offered compensation and the amount the Hoffmanns contend represents fair market value; those figures would be contained in the sealed or unsealed valuation exhibits filed in the district court record. Oral argument dates and the full list of amicus participants have not yet been confirmed on the Supreme Court's public docket as of July 29, 2026.