in this instance was to grant to the railroad a right-of-way for use as a rail corridor. Based on Tennessee rules of deed construction and the language of the Graff and Golightly Deeds, the court finds that the Thomas plaintiffs are therefore entitled to summary judgment on this issue. D. The government is liable for a taking of plaintiffs’ property interests. Having determined that the easements granted by condemnation, prescription, and the Mullins/Small, Graff, and Go-lightly Deeds conveyed easements limited to railroad purposes only, the court must now determine, under the second step of the Federal Circuit’s Preseault II framework, whether railbanking and trail use fall outside the scope of these railroad purpose easements under Tennessee law. Preseault II, 100 F.3d at 1533 (<HOLDING>). Under Preseault II, if recreational trail use
holding that reinstatement of the grievant a railroad employee terminated for drug and alcohol use violated the welldefined and dominant public policy against a railroads employment of individuals whose impaired judgment due to the use of drugs or alcohol could seriously threaten public safety and placed the railroad at risk of violating the federal railroad administration regulations holding railroad rate exempt from state regulation holding that the court must ask if the railroad acquired only easements were the terms of the easements limited to use for railroad purposes or did they include future use as public recreational trails holding that in a personal injury action against a railroad a report containing the conclusions of a hearing examiner of the public utilities commission regarding an alleged hazardous railroad crossing was obvious hearsay recognizing a selfevaluative privilege to railroad companys investigation of an accident in light of the publics stake in the improvement of railroad safety