Mineral rights on original land grant owners

Oil and Gas Leasing Help
1

2 Questions:

My gggrandfather was an original land grantee, Ramon de Ynojosa. His name is still on the oil production for the property. He was granted 81,407.83 acres in Nueces County, Texas 1/23/1832 (El Rincon de Corpus Christi). We have the copies of the Spanish / Texas / US land deeds. His widower and eldest son, my ggrandfather, sold the land to Peter Schatzle on 9/18/1845.

1 question: How do we know whether any mineral rights were retained? I do not believe that is stated in the deed either way. Also, how do I know if there are mineral rights being paid out currently on said land?

2 question: It also states on the sale of the property that the Hinojosa’s sold 10 leagues of land which constitutes only 40K acres. What about the other 40K acres?

I called the Texas Land Management in Austin, Texas and the gentleman could not answer, he was the one that told me that 10 leagues was only about 40K acres.

Any help on either discussion would be greatly appreciated it.

Alex Griss

2
  1. If it is not stated either way, no mineral rights are reserved or retained. In 1845, people didn’t have the mindset to reserve minerals much. They were still riding horses. Spindletop, for example, was still 56 years off.

When you say his name is still on production for the property, I’m guessing you saw a well sign or something like that. They may just be referencing the original land grant. If there are any wells on the property, someone should be receiving royalty payments. It will be difficult if you haven’t done it before, but you can go to the Nueces County Deed Records and see who has been leasing the land for oil & gas, or someone with research experience could probably tell you that fairly easily. As far as production, if you can figure out how to navigate the Texas Railroad Commission site, their maps would show you where wells are located, if any, dry holes etc…

  1. No one here can really help with specific title questions, unless they researched it themselves. That typically takes time and costs money.

From what you have written however, it sounds like your family sold both surface and minerals in 1845.

3

Thanks Mr. Quincy. I wasn’t sure about when the rights were beginning to be retained or not, so thank you for that information. Yes, I am sure that they are just referencing the original land grant.

I will check with the deed records to see about the leasing.

Thanks again,

Alex

Dave Quincy said:

  1. If it is not stated either way, no mineral rights are reserved or retained. In 1845, people didn’t have the mindset to reserve minerals much. They were still riding horses. Spindletop, for example, was still 56 years off.

When you say his name is still on production for the property, I’m guessing you saw a well sign or something like that. They may just be referencing the original land grant. If there are any wells on the property, someone should be receiving royalty payments. It will be difficult if you haven’t done it before, but you can go to the Nueces County Deed Records and see who has been leasing the land for oil & gas, or someone with research experience could probably tell you that fairly easily. As far as production, if you can figure out how to navigate the Texas Railroad Commission site, their maps would show you where wells are located, if any, dry holes etc…

  1. No one here can really help with specific title questions, unless they researched it themselves. That typically takes time and costs money.

From what you have written however, it sounds like your family sold both surface and minerals in 1845.

4
5

Dear Mr. Griss,

Concerning Leagues and Labors and what they are:

In order to understand leagues and labors, you must start with a vara, which is a unit of measurement equivalent to 33 1/3 inches. Some people refer to a vara as the Spanish yard. The vara was set by a Texas Supreme Court case. In California, for example, a vara is a slightly different measurement.

A league is 5,000 varas square, or 25,000,000 square varas, or 4,428.4 acres. This was considered enough acreage to run cattle.

A labor is 1,000 varas square, or 1,000,000 square varas, or 177.1 acres. A labor was considered enough to farm for your family.

There are many categories of land grants given by the Republic of Texas, Mexico and the Kingdom of Spain to encourage colonization.

If memory serves me right, minerals were actually claimed by the Republic and then State of Texas until a lawsuit in what I think was Hidalgo County placed minerals into private ownership, which was later formalized by a constitutional change. Also, I do recall that minerals were not confirmed by the Supreme Court of Texas as being realty until the early 1900s.

There have been more than a few suits from heirs of Spanish and Mexican land grants against current owners of the soil, particularly in South Texas, including Nueces County. I do not think that any were successfully litigated.

Attached is a pdf file on categories of land grants.

6

Thank you Mr. Cotten,

I will read up on the difference between Leagues and Labors, thank you for the article.

Basically you are saying that if and when the land was sold, prior to the 1900s the mineral rights were not retained but sold along with the land?

Thanks again,

7

It appears that the land was a part of the Republic of Texas when it was sold by your great, great grandfather in 1845. There was an interesting link on history posted, but it still appears with retroactive laws, court rulings, and after all the dust settled, the minerals still went to the owner of the soil.

One of the postings claims specific knowledge of lawsuits by heirs such as yourself attempting to recover the mineral rights. None of the claims was said to have won in court.

As to any residual land that you are not sure about, no one can answer that here. It would need to be chained out from Sovereignty of soil forward. Good luck.

8

Thank you Mr. Quincy. Do you, by chance, know where I can find the link on the lawsuits, just to read up on it.

Thank you once again,

Alex

Dave Quincy said:

It appears that the land was a part of the Republic of Texas when it was sold by your great, great grandfather in 1845. There was an interesting link on history posted, but it still appears with retroactive laws, court rulings, and after all the dust settled, the minerals still went to the owner of the soil.

One of the postings claims specific knowledge of lawsuits by heirs such as yourself attempting to recover the mineral rights. None of the claims was said to have won in court.

As to any residual land that you are not sure about, no one can answer that here. It would need to be chained out from Sovereignty of soil forward. Good luck.

9

Here is who you need to talk to. She has handled many claims similar to yours. If you can make it to Laredo on April 18, it looks like there is a presentation covering your questions. See attached link.

Eileen McKenzie Fowler

Attorney-at-Law

Box 490, LaPorte, TX 77572

Tel: 1-866-521-LAND (5263)

www.EileenMcKenzieFowler.com

Alejandra Griss said:

Thank you Mr. Quincy. Do you, by chance, know where I can find the link on the lawsuits, just to read up on it.

Thank you once again,

Alex

Dave Quincy said:

It appears that the land was a part of the Republic of Texas when it was sold by your great, great grandfather in 1845. There was an interesting link on history posted, but it still appears with retroactive laws, court rulings, and after all the dust settled, the minerals still went to the owner of the soil.

One of the postings claims specific knowledge of lawsuits by heirs such as yourself attempting to recover the mineral rights. None of the claims was said to have won in court.

As to any residual land that you are not sure about, no one can answer that here. It would need to be chained out from Sovereignty of soil forward. Good luck.

10

Thank you once again Mr. Quincy. I will try my best to get to Laredo and hear the presentation. I will also check out this website.

Dave Quincy said:

Here is who you need to talk to. She has handled many claims similar to yours. If you can make it to Laredo on April 18, it looks like there is a presentation covering your questions. See attached link.

Eileen McKenzie Fowler

Attorney-at-Law

Box 490, LaPorte, TX 77572

Tel: 1-866-521-LAND (5263)

www.EileenMcKenzieFowler.com

Alejandra Griss said:

Thank you Mr. Quincy. Do you, by chance, know where I can find the link on the lawsuits, just to read up on it.

Thank you once again,

Alex

Dave Quincy said:

It appears that the land was a part of the Republic of Texas when it was sold by your great, great grandfather in 1845. There was an interesting link on history posted, but it still appears with retroactive laws, court rulings, and after all the dust settled, the minerals still went to the owner of the soil.

One of the postings claims specific knowledge of lawsuits by heirs such as yourself attempting to recover the mineral rights. None of the claims was said to have won in court.

As to any residual land that you are not sure about, no one can answer that here. It would need to be chained out from Sovereignty of soil forward. Good luck.

11

You’re welcome. Check out Breaking News on her site. It looks like she has had a lot of success in the declaration of various heirs. I know she may not have handled all of it. If any of our answers weren’t that good, hopefully this gets you to the right place. It sounds like this is her specialty.

Alejandra Griss said:

Thank you once again Mr. Quincy. I will try my best to get to Laredo and hear the presentation. I will also check out this website.

Dave Quincy said:

Here is who you need to talk to. She has handled many claims similar to yours. If you can make it to Laredo on April 18, it looks like there is a presentation covering your questions. See attached link.

Eileen McKenzie Fowler

Attorney-at-Law

Box 490, LaPorte, TX 77572

Tel: 1-866-521-LAND (5263)

www.EileenMcKenzieFowler.com

Alejandra Griss said:

Thank you Mr. Quincy. Do you, by chance, know where I can find the link on the lawsuits, just to read up on it.

Thank you once again,

Alex

Dave Quincy said:

It appears that the land was a part of the Republic of Texas when it was sold by your great, great grandfather in 1845. There was an interesting link on history posted, but it still appears with retroactive laws, court rulings, and after all the dust settled, the minerals still went to the owner of the soil.

One of the postings claims specific knowledge of lawsuits by heirs such as yourself attempting to recover the mineral rights. None of the claims was said to have won in court.

As to any residual land that you are not sure about, no one can answer that here. It would need to be chained out from Sovereignty of soil forward. Good luck.