This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The Institute for Justice says it is helping Melisa Robinson go to court – AGAIN – to collect what the Oklahoma Supreme Court already has ruled a city owes her.

The problem is that an entity run by the city of Okay, its Public Works Authority, was ruled by the high court to owe Robinson $73,000 damages – now $200,000 including interest, for having its workers dig "a sewer line" on a small mobile home community owned by Robinson.

There was no permission, no authorization for that to have happened.

But the city says the Public Works division is a trust, and while it may owe Robison money, that division's assets all are owned by the city, and it claims no responsibility for the judgment.

"No one would sell their house if, at closing, the buyer showed up with an IOU instead of with money, but that's exactly what Okay is trying to get away with here," said IJ Attorney Brian Morris. "But constitutional rights aren't a shell game. Government officials nationwide have to obey the Fifth Amendment, full stop."

That constitutional provision forbids the government from taking property "without just compensation."

The IJ said in Robinson's case, Okay began digging a brand-new sewer line on her property—without obtaining permission and without giving notice.

The entity actually owned a sewer easement on the land next door. It didn't own anything on Melisa's land, but it dug anyway.

Besides the new, and nonfunctioning line, there was much damage to the property.

Robison demanded restitution and compensation and won at the state Supreme Court which said the city of Okay owed Robinson.

But she's back in court now, with a federal lawsuit, demanding payment.

"Okay needs to pay what the Oklahoma Supreme Court says it owes me," she said. "If the city can do this to me, there's nothing stopping any government from doing the same thing to others. I want to be paid and I want to put a stop to this before it catches on."

The IJ said, "Recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions concerning the Fifth Amendment's takings clause have favored property owners. In an IJ case from the last term, DeVillier v. Texas, the court ruled that Texas could not use legal maneuvering to keep itself from being sued by a rancher whose land was flooded by a state project. IJ is also defending home and business owners fighting eminent domain in Missouri and Mississippi. In a case from the previous term in which IJ filed an amicus brief, Tyler v. Hennepin County, the Court ruled that the government could not seize property for failure to pay taxes and pocket money above what the taxpayer owed."