[Oatka]

From the article: “TransCanada’s lawsuit suggests the company might seek up to $500,000 in damages.

That knocked the fight out of Daniel. He and TransCanada struck an agreement, which neither Daniel nor the company will discuss.”

As a fella said, “Follow the money.”

I suspect his “noble” resistance hinged on how much money he could extract from TransCanada.

[Milton Miteybad]

From the article: “TransCanada’s lawsuit suggests the company might seek up to $500,000 in damages.

That knocked the fight out of Daniel. He and TransCanada struck an agreement, which neither Daniel nor the company will discuss.”

As a fella said, “Follow the money.”

I suspect his “noble” resistance hinged on how much money he could extract from TransCanada.

NOTE: (Milton Miteybad has negotiated any number of pipeline and fiber optic easements in the past.)

The article mentions that TransCanada wanted to enlist the assistance of the county sheriff to lawfully gain access to "the easement." Apparently there was an easement in place; otherwise there would be no basis for any enforcement action on the part of the sheriff. It is my guess that the previous owner of Daniel's tract granted an easement to TransCanada, then sold the tract to Daniel. Nothing illegal about that, as long as the purchaser (Daniel) was made aware of the existence of the easement at the time of sale.

Either Daniel failed to comprehend that his 20 acres was subject to an easement, or he decided that it made no difference to him, and he wanted to buy the land anyway. No matter; he apparently acquired it subject to the TransCanada easement.

This is why TransCanada went to the sheriff seeking relief. "We have a right to be there, Sheriff," TransCanada was saying. "The previous owner sold us a valid and subsisting pipeline easement, and we need to get onto this property for the purpose of enjoying the rights the previous owner sold to us."

So, you're entirely correct in your assessment that Mr. Daniel was moved by a bit of monetary motivation, which is a fairly common tactic in situations like this. The pipeline operator usually gives the recalcitrant surface owner a choice: "Either we sue you for $500,000 for unlawfully interfering with our exercise of our legal rights, or we can pay you $50,000 to stand aside and let us do our business. If you choose the first option, you will lose, and you'll get to pay everybody's legal costs, too. If you choose the second, we all win. Which will it be, Mr. Daniel?"

Only the real hardheads are going to choose Option No. 1. But there's always one or two who do. ;-)