Denali Summit, LLC v. Union Electric Company, d/b/a Ameren Missouri

Jefferson City, Missouri, commercial civil litigation lawyers represented the parties in an easement dispute.



In 1926, the FERC issued a license to Walter Cravens to construct a dam across

Missouri's Osage River and to generate hydroelectric power from the resulting

reservoir. Ameren acquired rights to the Osage Project in 1929, while the dam

remained under construction. As part of the project, Ameren obtained a flooding

easement from property owners named Hart so that the company could flood the

Harts' land when the dam was completed. In 1931, Ameren closed the dam and

flooded the area now known as the Lake of the Ozarks.



Ameren operated the Osage Project for 50 years under its initial license. The

FERC reissued Ameren's license in 1981 and 2007. In its order issuing Ameren's

2007 license, the FERC required Ameren to file a shoreline management plan, and

the current plan was adopted in 2017. The plan requires all parties to obtain a permit

before constructing any structure along the shoreline. Ameren issues permits for

tructures that conform to the plan and regularly inspects the shoreline to monitor

compliance.



In 2022, Denali Summit purchased the property formerly owned by the Harts,

subject to Ameren's 1930 easement. Denali Summit applied to Ameren for permits

to construct docks, but Ameren denied the applications because the proposed docks

exceeded the maximum length allowed under the shoreline management plan. Denali

Summit proceeded to install noncompliant docks, seawalls, and erosion-control

measures, as well as a noncompliant breakwater.



When Ameren demanded that Denali Summit remove the structures and

comply with the plan, Denali Summit sued Ameren in state court. The action sought

a declaratory judgment that Ameren's conduct infringed on Denali Summit's property

rights and an order quieting title. Ameren removed the suit to federal court, and

brought counterclaims to quiet title and to enjoin Denali Summit from allegedly

violating the FERC order that issued Ameren's license. See 16 U.S.C. § 825p.

Ameren also sought a preliminary injunction requiring Denali Summit to halt new

construction and either to remove the existing structures or to demonstrate their

compliance with the plan. The district court denied the motion on the ground that the

FERC license did not affect Denali Summit's rights in the land.



Ameren then renewed its motion for a preliminary injunction with additional

briefing and documents. This time, the district court granted the motion in part. The

court concluded that Ameren had shown a likelihood of success on its quiet-title

claim because the FERC license gave Ameren the right to control structures within

the project boundary, and the easement did not "negate[]” Ameren's authority under

the license. The court also determined that Denali Summit's actions caused

irreparable harm to Ameren, and that an injunction was warranted after considering

the relevant factors. See Dataphase Sys., Inc. v. C. L. Sys., Inc., 640 F.2d 109, 113

-3-(8th Cir. 1981) (en banc).

The court enjoined Denali Summit from working on existing structures, constructing new structures, leasing boat slips, and using existing structures for commercial purposes.



Reversed