PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1532

MOUNTAIN VALLEY PIPELINE, LLC,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

8.37 ACRES OF LAND, OWNED BY FRANK H. TERRY, JR., JOHN COLES TERRY, III, AND ELIZABETH LEE TERRY ALSO KNOWN AS ELIZABETH LEE REYNOLDS ROANOKE COUNTY TAX MAP PARCEL NO. 102.00-01- 02.00-0000 AND BEING MVP PARCEL NO. VA-RO-046,

Defendant – Appellant,

and

CHARLES MALCOLM LOLLAR, SR.

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Elizabeth Kay Dillon, District Judge. (7:20-cv-00134-EKD)

Argued: March 21, 2024 Decided: May 14, 2024

Before GREGORY, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Reversed, vacated, and remanded by published opinion. Judge Thacker wrote the opinion, in which Judge Gregory and Judge Wynn joined. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1532 Doc: 43 Filed: 05/14/2024 Pg: 2 of 19

ARGUED: Norman A. Thomas, NORMAN A. THOMAS, PLLC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Wade Wallihan Massie, PENN, STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Joseph V. Sherman, JOSEPH V. SHERMAN, P.C., Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant. Seth M. Land, PENN, STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee.

2 USCA4 Appeal: 23-1532 Doc: 43 Filed: 05/14/2024 Pg: 3 of 19

THACKER, Circuit Judge:

Mountain Valley Pipeline (“Appellee”) is constructing an interstate natural gas

pipeline. Through condemnation actions pursuant to the Natural Gas Act, Appellee

acquired easements on properties along the pipeline’s route. Property owned by Frank

Terry, John Coles Terry, and Elizabeth Terry (“Appellants”) was one such property,

which was encumbered by temporary and permanent easements on 8.37 acres. After the

district court granted Appellee immediate possession of the easements, the case

proceeded to a jury trial to determine the amount of just compensation owed by Appellee

to Appellants for the easements.

At trial, various appraisers testified as to the land’s value before and after the

easements. Ultimately, the jury rendered a $523,327 verdict. Appellee moved for

judgment as a matter of law. It argued that the verdict resulted from the jury improperly

mixing expert testimony. After this appeal was docketed, the district court agreed with

Appellee and granted judgment as a matter of law. The court vacated the $523,327 jury

verdict, entered a judgment for $261,033, and conditionally granted a new trial with the

option of remittitur.

Because the jury’s $523,327 verdict can be supported by credited testimony

without mixing different land use valuations, as the district court assumed, we reverse the

district court’s judgment as a matter of law and remand with instructions to reinstate the

$523,327 verdict. We also reverse the grant of a new trial.

Additionally, Appellants moved for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to federal

law. On that motion, the district court held that federal law did not entitle Appellants to

3 USCA4 Appeal: 23-1532 Doc: 43 Filed: 05/14/2024 Pg: 4 of 19

attorney’s fees. Appellants filed a second motion for attorney’s fees, which asserted that

Virginia law applied. The district court denied the second motion, holding t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document