TEXAS — Matterhorn Express filed a motion on June 16, 2026, requesting a judge overturn a jury's verdict or schedule a new trial. This action follows a jury's April 2026 order for Matterhorn Express to pay Ty and Leslie Eggemeyer approximately $7 million for easement rights and property damages.

The Eggemeyers received notice in 2022 regarding a planned pipeline project traversing their property in Lampasas County. The Matterhorn Express pipeline project is designed to transport Permian Basin gas 580 miles to the Houston area. It is majority-owned by WhiteWater Midstream, an infrastructure company based in Austin, and utilizes eminent domain authority for easement acquisition.

The pipeline route includes a half-mile strip of the Eggemeyers' nearly 4,000-acre Artemis Ranch, which they operate as an eco-tourism wildlife resort. Matterhorn Express made an initial offer of approximately $21,000 for the land easement, which the Eggemeyers refused. The jury's verdict was approximately 330 times greater than the company's final offer. "We've been pushing our ranch as an eco-tourism ranch. How does that fit with a 42-inch gas pipeline running through the front entrance?" said Ty Eggemeyer, landowner.

Pipeline companies typically file condemnation suits in state district courts when agreements with landowners are not reached. "Over 80% or 90% of landowners will negotiate 10% or 20% more than that final written offer and think they've hit a home run," said Chris Johns, an eminent domain attorney in Austin. Texas law grants eminent domain authority to private companies for projects serving a public purpose, requiring pipelines to qualify as common carriers by transporting products for third-party customers. "I had tears running down my face," Eggemeyer said after the verdict.

Texas law requires developers to make a bona fide offer based on a property appraisal and engage in good-faith negotiations. If a landowner rejects an offer, developers can file a condemnation suit, leading to a special commission recommending a price. The developer can take possession after depositing the recommended price into the court's registry. "The 'bona fide offer' is a joke," said Jeff Mundy, an environmental law attorney based in Austin. In 2004, the Texas Supreme Court ruled in Hubenak v. San Jacinto Gas Transmission Co. that any dollar amount constitutes a bona fide offer and courts do not evaluate its reasonableness. Matterhorn Express obtained a temporary restraining order allowing surveying of the Eggemeyers' land three months after the initial condemnation notice.

Why It Matters

This legal dispute involves tensions between pipeline development and private property rights in Texas. The jury award to the Eggemeyers exceeded the initial offer. The case brings attention to the application of eminent domain and what constitutes a bona fide offer under Texas law, particularly following the 2004 Texas Supreme Court ruling in Hubenak v. San Jacinto Gas Transmission Co. Several new gas pipeline projects are expected to be completed in Texas by 2029.