I wonder if anyone could help me with a question I have about the correct reading of a mineral rights description. I own a couple of parcels in Grady County which were deeded to me by my father before his death. A land man has contacted me about one of these, saying that there are 9 acres which were not included in the conveyance to me (with a quit-claim deed in 2001). The description is evidently exactly the same as the parcel I do clearly own. My question is this: the description in the deed reads “an undivided one- twenty-fourth interest in the SW ¼ (etc.., etc.) of Section 9; the NW ¼ (etc., etc.) of Section 16.” The 9 acres in question are in Section 16. It appears to me that the phrase “an undivided one- twenty-fourth interest” might apply only to the parcel in Section 9. If that were so, then the description after the semicolon (“the NW ¼ (etc., etc.) of Section 16.”) might in fact include the questionable 9 acres. I’m wondering if there’s a way of establishing this without hiring an Oklahoma oil lawyer to file papers with the state. If the 9 acres aren't included, they might be considered "intestate property" as part of my father's estate, in which case I may have to file an Affidavit of Heirship and go through probate. Anybody out there have an informed opinion?
What a mess. I hope an attorney did not prepare that deed.
I pulled a copy and I think I see what the confusion is.
The way I read it, the undivided 1/24th only applies to the first description in section 9. After that everything else is all of the rights (that he owned) within the tracts described.
There are 150 gross acres described in section 16. Is he trying to give you credit only for 1/24 of the 150? 6.25NMA? Or could there be a tract missing from the description?
If the intent was to grant 1/24 in each of the sections, then it should have said Grant 1/24 undivided interest in each of the following tracts: And then listed them.
With your permission I'll post the entire description so others might weigh in their opinion.
I am not an attorney or a landman and would be interested in what the professionals have to say!
Thanks for response Rick. That's the way I read it, too. I'd certainly be interested in anybody else's take on it.
Rick Howell said:
What a mess. I hope an attorney did not prepare that deed.
I pulled a copy and I think I see what the confusion is.
The way I read it, the undivided 1/24th only applies to the first description in section 9. After that everything else is all of the rights (that he owned) within the tracts described.
There are 150 gross acres described in section 16. Is he trying to give you credit only for 1/24 of the 150? 6.25NMA? Or could there be a tract missing from the description?
If the intent was to grant 1/24 in each of the sections, then it should have said Grant 1/24 undivided interest in each of the following tracts: And then listed them.With your permission I'll post the entire description so others might weigh in their opinion.
I am not an attorney or a landman and would be interested in what the professionals have to say!