Chinook Landing, LLC v. United States

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 disavowed any interest in the same property?