North Dakota v. United States

This case is one of several dealing with federal wetlands easements in North Dakota and Minnesota. The issue concerning whether the government was required to identify the specific wetlands acreage was further resolved in favor of the landowner in United States v. Johansen, 93 F.3d 459 (8th Cir., 1996).

The court found that Schwent’s suit against the federal government sounded in takings so therefore the Court of Federal Claims had jurisdiction not the District Court and the nuisance claim against Willets was entirely based on state law and not federal law.

The Land Trust Alliance has long held that amendment clauses in conservation easements serve to strengthen easements and improve their enforceability. That's why we oppose efforts by the IRS to constrain the ability of land trusts to amend easements.

And now — thanks to a recent federal court decision — it's clear that a sound amendment clause upholds conservation purposes.

In land swap case, the Court ruled that the park statutes and regulations were not intended to create a legally protected interest that would justify standing to sue.