No. 25-462

Chinook Landing, LLC v. United States

Lower Court: Federal Circuit
Docketed: 2025-10-15
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Experienced Counsel
Tags: adverse-interest federal-circuit government-easement property-rights quiet-title-act statute-of-limitations
Key Terms:
Takings
Latest Conference: 2026-01-16
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is a Quiet Title Act claim timely if it is filed within twelve years of the government asserting an interest in plaintiff's property, after government officials previously disavowed any interest in the same property?

Question Presented (from Petition)

In 1955, Petitioner’s predecessor granted to the United States a transmission line easement , now managed by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). In March 2011, BPA officials approached Petitioner’s immediate predecessor , John Lund , to acquire an access easement to use an existing road on his property , admitting it had “ no easement for an access road. ” Pet. App. 91a. Even though negotiations to acquire an access easement failed, BPA used the road without Mr. Lund’s permission . In response, Mr. Lund filed a Quiet Title Act (QTA) lawsuit in 2019. The District Court held that Mr. Lund filed his complaint outside the Quiet Title Act’s twelve -year statute of limitations because he or his predecessor should have known in 1955 that BPA claimed an easement to use the road on his property . The Federal Circuit affirmed and—in conflict with thirty -five years of Ninth Circuit precedent holding that “[i]f the government has apparently abandoned any claim it once asserted, and then it reasserts a claim, the later assertion is a new claim ” under the Quiet Title Act “ and the statute of limitations for an action based on that [new] claim accrues when it is asserted ,” Shultz v. Dep ’t of Army, U.S. , 886 F.2d 1157, 1161 (9th Cir. 1989) —held that Mr. Lund’s one and only Quiet Title Act claim accrued in 1955. The question presented is: Is a Quiet Title Act claim timely if it is filed within twelve years of the government asserting an interest in plaintiff’s property , after government officials previously disavow ed any interest in the same property?

Docket Entries

2026-01-20
Petition DENIED.
2025-12-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/16/2026.
2025-12-23
Reply of Chinook Landing, LLC submitted.
2025-12-23
Reply of petitioner Chinook Landing, LLC filed. (Distributed)
2025-12-15
Brief of United States in opposition submitted.
2025-12-15
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2025-10-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 15, 2025.
2025-10-27
Motion of United States for an extension of time submitted.
2025-10-27
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 14, 2025 to December 15, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
2025-10-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 14, 2025)
2025-08-14
Application (25A175) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until October 10, 2025.
2025-08-07
Application (25A175) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from September 15, 2025 to October 10, 2025, submitted to The Chief Justice.

Attorneys

Chinook Landing, LLC
Jeffrey Wilson McCoyPacific Legal Foundation, Petitioner
Jeffrey Wilson McCoyPacific Legal Foundation, Petitioner
United States
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent