Northville Dock Pipe Line Corp. v. Fanning, 21 N.Y.2d 616 (1968)
A pipeline corporation seeking to survey land for a potential route need not prove the pipeline will serve a public use until it initiates formal condemnation proceedings.
Summary
Northville Dock Pipe Line Corp. sought an injunction to allow surveying of the Fanning’s farmland for a potential pipeline route. The Fannings refused access, fearing surveyors would introduce a crop-destroying pest. The lower courts denied the injunction, holding Northville had not proven the pipeline would serve a “public use,” a prerequisite for exercising eminent domain power. The New York Court of Appeals reversed, holding that proof of public use is not required at the survey stage but only if and when condemnation proceedings are initiated. The court remanded for a determination of what measures Northville must take to protect the Fannings from potential damages during the survey.
Facts
Northville Dock Pipe Line Corp., a subsidiary of Northville Dock Corp., planned to construct a pipeline across Long Island. Part of the proposed route crossed farmland owned by the Fannings. Northville requested permission to survey the Fanning’s land, but the Fannings refused. They feared the surveyors would carry the “golden nematode,” a worm that could destroy their potato crop, onto their property. Northville then sued seeking an injunction to prevent the Fannings from interfering with the survey.
Procedural History
Northville sought an injunction in Special Term to restrain the Fannings from obstructing the survey. Special Term denied the injunction, finding that the proposed pipeline was not for “public use.” The Appellate Division affirmed this decision. The Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal.
Issue(s)
Whether a pipeline corporation must prove that a contemplated pipeline will serve a public use before it can conduct an exploratory survey to determine the most advantageous route, as authorized by Section 81 of the Transportation Corporations Law.
Holding
No, because a pipeline corporation is not required to prove that a contemplated pipeline will serve a public use before conducting an exploratory survey; such proof is only required when the corporation seeks to exercise its condemnation power in a later proceeding.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals acknowledged the established principle that a corporation must act for a “public use” when exercising its condemnation powers, citing Matter of Split Rock Cable Road Co., 128 N. Y. 408, and Denihan Enterprises v. O’Dwyer, 302 N. Y. 451, 457. However, the court distinguished the present situation, noting that Northville was merely seeking to survey the land, not to condemn it. The court reasoned that requiring proof of public use at the survey stage was premature. As the court explained, “Petitioner may not exercise the power of condemnation unless it seeks to take private property for a public use.” The court further noted that delaying the public use determination until the condemnation phase allows Northville to gather necessary information about potential users of the pipeline. The court emphasized that the Fannings could challenge the public use at the condemnation stage, if it occurs. Finally, the court remanded the case to Special Term to determine what measures and security were required to protect the Fannings from potential damages arising from the survey, as provided by Transportation Corporations Law, § 81, subd. 1.