In Sunoco Pipeline L.P. v. Teter, Ohio’s Seventh District Court of Appeals rejected a landowner challenge to Sunoco’s acquisition of an easement through eminent domain to construct its Mariner East 2 Pipeline. The landowner contested Sunoco’s exercise of eminent domain on the basis that pure propane and pure butane (i.e., the liquids to be transported by the pipeline) were not “petroleum” for purposes of R.C. 1723.01, which permits common carriers to appropriate land. The court found that while R.C. 1723.01 did not define “petroleum,” other Ohio statues and administrative code provisions indicated that pure propane and butane were considered petroleum, and that such a construction was supported by considering the technical or industry definition of “petroleum” as well as its historic meaning. Further, the court rejected the landowner’s claim that the appropriation was not “necessary” or for a “public use.”

Click here to read the decision.