Stewart, Wald & Smith wins key rail-to-trail liability ruling for nine Maryland landowners

A U.S. Court of Federal Claims ruling in Blake v. United States gives nine Maryland landowners a major win in a rail-to-trail takings case tied to a former railroad corridor in Hurlock, Dorchester County. The decision clears the way for compensation proceedings over whether converting railroad easements to a public trail exceeded the railroad’s property rights.

Why it matters: - The ruling advances nine Maryland landowners toward potential Fifth Amendment compensation for the federal government’s taking of property for rail-to-trail use. - The court’s decision could also matter for other owners along the same corridor who may have similar claims. - A public trail can serve a community purpose, but private owners may still be owed compensation when the government converts a narrow railroad easement into a new recreational use.

What happened: - U.S. Court of Federal Claims Judge Ryan T. Holte granted partial summary judgment on liability to the landowners in Blake v. United States, No. 24-1372, in a September 16, 2026 opinion. - The court denied the federal government’s competing motion. - Stewart, Wald & Smith represented nine Maryland landowners seeking compensation for the taking of property along a former railroad corridor in the City of Hurlock, Dorchester County, Maryland. - The ruling found that converting the railroad easements across the properties to a public recreational trail exceeded the rights the railroad held.

The details: - The case concerns three segments of the Cambridge Secondary Track totaling about 14.73 miles. - The affected stretches run between Cambridge and Linkwood, between Hurlock and Preston, and a short segment within Hurlock. - The property rights trace back to the 1890s, when the Baltimore and Eastern Shore Railroad acquired rights to operate across privately owned land. - Most of the easements at issue were created by deeds granting the railroad a right-of-way “for its road bed.” - The federal government argued Maryland law allowed the easements to accommodate a recreational trail because railroads and trails could both be considered public highways. - Stewart, Wald & Smith argued the railroad’s rights were narrower and did not authorize a new public recreational use. - The court sided with the landowners and agreed the trail conversion exceeded the original railroad rights. - Stewart, Wald & Smith filed the lawsuit on September 4, 2024, after the Surface Transportation Board issued a Certificate of Interim Trail Use on August 30, 2024. - The certificate authorized railbanking, which preserves a corridor for possible future railroad service while allowing interim trail use. - The complaint was amended in October 2024 and again in February 2025 to add additional landowners. - The amended claims sought compensation for the property taken, damage to remaining property, and other recoverable amounts. - In March 2025, the Maryland Transit Administration and Dorchester County notified the Surface Transportation Board that they had entered into an interim trail use agreement covering all three segments.

Between the lines: - The ruling turns on the scope of an old railroad easement, not just on the fact that a trail was planned. - The decision underscores a common rail-to-trail issue: a railroad may have possessed only limited rights over land that still belonged to private owners. - Stewart, Wald & Smith said its investigation identified 37 additional parcels along the corridor that could support compensation claims against the United States. - The court’s current ruling applies only to the nine landowners in Blake and does not automatically award compensation to other owners. - Each additional claim would require review of the property’s ownership history, the railroad’s rights, and ownership when the taking occurred.

What’s next: - Stewart, Wald & Smith will now seek to establish the value of the land taken for the trail. - The amount of compensation has not been determined. - Owners of adjoining property may need to have their rights evaluated even if they assumed the railroad owned the strip outright. - Landowners who believe their property may be affected can contact Stewart, Wald & Smith at 314-720-0220 to discuss a potential compensation claim.

The bottom line: - The liability ruling gives the nine Maryland landowners a significant step toward compensation and opens the door to more potential rail-to-trail takings claims along the same corridor.