Can two people (a married couple at the time of the purchase) be combined on one affidavit of heirship or must we separate them on different affidavits?
Clarifying, went too quickly: married when rights purchased but some heirs are separate (previous kids from previous marriages) but property involved is the same. Midland County. Thanks!
I assume that both are deceased, from a Division Order Analyst perspective, it is much cleaner to do one for each. It will give a better timeline and since there are kids from other marriages it will make the proper distribution clear.
Thank you… we went ahead and did both. Yes, they are both deceased.
Now, we are getting new letters from a totally different company AND the one who holds the current lease on the property popped up with another parcel, asking us if we were laying claim to it as well. I cannot tell if these are 2 different descriptions of the same property or not.
Does the letter about the additional parcel include a detailed legal description?
They could be referring to acreage that is not held by the lease because of a Pugh Clause or something like that (if the new letter is the same acreage as the other one mentioned).
Or they could just be sending you blanket letters because you recently filed the Affidavit.
Apparently it’s a totally different property, which is not a surprise because FIL used to build subdivisions and there were a lot of “little properties”.
Next question that I posted in the other thread: If property is sold at auction (sheriff’s tax sale), do the mineral rights automatically convey if they’ve not been previously separated/ addressed? Or are they always treated as separate entities?
I see, it looks like you might own other parcels from your FIL (but maybe just the surface because often developers don’t own the minerals and surface). Has nobody else ever mentioned or offered to buy in that other parcel?
The Sheriff’s Deed conveys whatever rights were owned by the debtor. So if that person owned some or all of the minerals then those mineral rights would be transferred by the Sheriff’s Deed.
But if they were excepted on any previous sale, then they’ve already been severed from the surface and never again “reattach”, correct?
And yes, I’m finding several, even some lots that were deeded to the city but the mineral rights were retained. Best I can tell, he no longer owns any surface property (according to the city appraisal site) but owns multiple mineral rights.
Correct. If they were excluded previously in another deed, then whoever omitted the minerals in the conveyance is the owner who’s chain you would follow to determine the mineral ownership.