Pipeline Takings and Just Compensation: Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission and the Future of Natural Gas Act Condemnations

Elizabeth U. Witmer
Elizabeth U. Witmer
Saul Ewing LLP

Elizabeth U. Witmer is Co-Chair of the Energy Practice and Vice Chair of the Transactional Department at Saul Ewing LLP, where she advises natural gas companies, public and private utilities, and commercial developers on interstate pipeline development, eminent domain and condemnations, land use, and appellate litigation.

Marshall Wall
Marshall Wall
Cranfill Sumner LLP

F. Marshall Wall is a Partner in the Raleigh office of Cranfill Sumner LLP, where he focuses his practice on eminent domain and land condemnation law, representing property owners in disputes with the North Carolina Department of Transportation and local government agencies.

Live Video-Broadcast: December 17, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

When a Private Pipeline Takes Land, Which Law Sets the Price

Section 7(h) of the Natural Gas Act lets private pipeline companies holding a FERC certificate exercise federal eminent domain. In Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission, the Supreme Court will decide whether just compensation in those condemnations follows the Fifth Amendment standard or state law. The Eighth Circuit applied the federal measure, and lower courts have divided on borrowing state compensation rules.

The choice is not academic. The Fifth Amendment fair-market-value standard excludes items such as attorney's fees, while some state regimes award fees, costs, and additional damages. Whichever rule prevails changes project budgets, right-of-way acquisition, and settlement leverage. Fail to preserve the compensation-standard argument in a pending case, and the decision may arrive too late to help.

Attendees walk out with a clear map of the arguments and likely outcomes, a valuation and evidence checklist, and a negotiation framework adjusted to each possible result in Hoffmann. It is practitioner judgment for advising landowners, developers, and lenders, from counsel who represent both pipeline companies and property owners in condemnation.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • NGA Section 7(h) Authority
    How a FERC certificate carries federal eminent domain power under 15 U.S.C. § 717f(h), and how PennEast read Section 7.
  • Federal or State Compensation
    How the Fifth Amendment measure, state fee-shifting regimes, and United States v. Kimbell Foods frame the question in Hoffmann.
  • Possible Outcomes
    What a ruling for the landowners or for WBI would mean for project budgets, settlement leverage, and other delegated takings.
  • Rule 71.1 and Immediate Possession
    How condemnation actions proceed, and how pipeline companies obtain possession after East Tennessee Natural Gas Co. v. Sage.
  • Proving Just Compensation
    How before-and-after valuation, severance damages, and Rule 702 expert evidence drive the compensation trial.
  • Negotiating While Hoffmann Is Pending
    How fee recovery shapes offers, settlement timing, and counseling for landowners, developers, and lenders.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: December 17, 2026

  • 2:30 pm – 4:40 pm Eastern
  • 1:30 pm – 3:40 pm Central
  • 12:30 pm – 2:40 pm Mountain
  • 11:30 am – 1:40 pm Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Elizabeth U. Witmer, Co-Chair, Energy Practice | Saul Ewing LLP

Elizabeth U. Witmer is Co-Chair of the Energy Practice and Vice Chair of the Transactional Department at Saul Ewing LLP, where she advises natural gas companies, public and private utilities, and commercial developers on interstate pipeline development, eminent domain and condemnations, land use, and appellate litigation. Over more than 25 years, she has helped clients secure federal, state, and local approvals and has defended those approvals through the appellate courts. She is especially well suited to this program: lead counsel in more than 150 federal condemnation actions, an amicus brief in Kelo v. City of New London, and appellate wins on FERC certificates and immediate possession of pipeline rights of way, bringing the perspective of counsel who takes pipeline projects from certificate through compensation.

  • Education & Credentials

Ms. Witmer earned her J.D. from Villanova University School of Law in 1989 and her B.B.A. from the College of William & Mary in 1985. She is admitted in New Jersey and Pennsylvania and before the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second, Third, and D.C. Circuits, and the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Middle Districts of Pennsylvania and the Northern District of New York.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Ms. Witmer has been named to The Best Lawyers in America for Real Estate Law and Utilities Law since 2025 and for Land Use and Zoning Law since 2024. She was selected for Pennsylvania Super Lawyers from 2004 to 2007 and from 2014 to 2016, named a Top Attorney by Suburban Life magazine in 2010, and designated one of the Great Lawyers on the Main Line by Main Line Today in 2004.

  • Professional Involvement

Ms. Witmer serves on the Board of Directors of the Chester County Chamber of Business & Industry and is a member of the Energy Bar Association, the Southern Gas Association, the Women’s Council on Energy and the Environment, and Women in Green Hydrogen. She is also a member of the American, Pennsylvania, and Chester County Bar Associations and is a former member of the Philadelphia Chapter of the International Right of Way Association.

  • Experience

Ms. Witmer is lead outside counsel for a $650 million, 124-mile greenfield interstate pipeline from Pennsylvania to New York and lead Pennsylvania counsel on a $2.65 billion, 123-mile pipeline expansion. She obtained a favorable jury award for a natural gas pipeline client in an eminent domain case in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and her appellate work includes Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Permanent Easements for 2.14 Acres (3d Cir. 2018), affirming immediate possession of pipeline rights of way, and Allegheny Defense Project v. FERC (D.C. Cir. 2020) (en banc). ®

 

Marshall Wall, Partner | Cranfill Sumner LLP

F. Marshall Wall is a Partner in the Raleigh office of Cranfill Sumner LLP, where he focuses his practice on eminent domain and land condemnation law, representing property owners in disputes with the North Carolina Department of Transportation and local government agencies. His goal is to protect property rights and make sure clients receive fair compensation when land is taken for public use, and he has been practicing law since 1999. He is especially well suited to this program: representation of property owners in eminent domain negotiations and litigation, complex right-of-way disputes, and negotiated settlements for clients whose properties were partially taken, bringing the perspective of a landowner-side trial lawyer focused on fair compensation.

  • Education & Credentials

Mr. Wall earned his J.D., cum laude, from Campbell University School of Law in 1999 and his B.A. from the University of North Carolina in 1996. He is admitted in North Carolina and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern, Middle, and Western Districts of North Carolina, and he is AV Rated by Martindale-Hubbell.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Wall served as Managing Partner of Cranfill Sumner for 10 years. He was named Best Lawyers Lawyer of the Year for Professional Malpractice Law – Defendants (2026) and Business Organizations (2027), has been selected for North Carolina Super Lawyers and its Top 100 list, and has been named to Business North Carolina’s Legal Elite and Power List.

  • Professional Involvement

Mr. Wall is a member of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel and serves on the Boards of Visitors of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Campbell Law School. He presented the webinar North Carolina Highway and Utility Rights-of-Way in August 2025.

  • Experience

Mr. Wall has guided property owners through negotiation and litigation when government takings threatened operational continuity and property value, and he has achieved favorable resolutions for clients whose properties were partially taken. A seasoned trial attorney, he has served as lead counsel in state and federal courts across North Carolina, including the North Carolina Business Court, and has resolved complex disputes through litigation, mediation, and arbitration.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – The Question Before the Court: Federal or State Law for Just Compensation in Natural Gas Act Condemnations Under 15 U.S.C. § 717f(h) | Elizabeth U. Witmer | 2:30pm – 3:30pm

This session examines the question the Supreme Court will hear on November 9, 2026 in Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission, Inc.: whether, in condemnations brought by private pipeline companies under Section 7(h) of the Natural Gas Act, just compensation is measured by the Fifth Amendment standard or by state law. Attorneys will learn how Section 7(h) delegates the federal eminent domain power to certificate holders, how the Eighth Circuit resolved the issue, how the choice between federal and state compensation rules has divided courts, and why the answer matters for attorney’s fees and other recoverable items. Attendees will leave with a clear map of the arguments, the role the United States is playing at argument, and the likely consequences of each outcome for pending and future pipeline projects.

BREAK | 3:30pm – 3:40pm

SESSION 2 – Litigating and Negotiating Pipeline Condemnations: Valuation, Fees, and Right-of-Way Strategy for Landowners and Developers | Marshall Wall | 3:40pm – 4:40pm

This session walks through the practical side of natural gas pipeline condemnations as the industry awaits the Court’s decision. Attorneys will learn how condemnation actions proceed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 71.1, how pipeline companies obtain immediate possession, how easement value and severance damages are proven, and how the fee question shapes offers, counteroffers, and settlement timing. Attendees will leave with a valuation and evidence checklist, a negotiation framework adjusted to each possible outcome in Hoffmann, and practical guidance for advising landowners, developers, and lenders.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Florida

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 General Hours

Receive CLE credit in Florida via attorney submission.
Georgia

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Illinois

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Indiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

Oregon

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
2 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Washington

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours

Receive CLE credit in Washington via attorney submission.
Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
AI-Augmented Legal Workflows: A Map to Success
AI-Augmented Legal Workflows: A Map to Success Tue, November 10, 2026
Live Webcast