Mineral rights transfer during a real estate sale

I owned 120 acres of land in Colorado that I bought with a specific provision in the contract that the mineral rights were included. I have since sold the property, but the contract only called for the transfer of water rights to the new owner. Do I still own the mineral rights?

Steve:

If the contract only addresses the transfer of water rights and not specifically mineral rights, I would think that you still own the minerals. It would be both parties responsibilities to carefully read the lease before signing. I would reread the entire contract again to make sure this mineral rights issue was not included in the body of the lease.

Thanks - it wasn’t a lease, it was a contract for sale. Perhaps that’s what you meant. Let me know if you still have the same opinion. Thanks again.

charles s mallory said:

Steve:

If the contract only addresses the transfer of water rights and not specifically mineral rights, I would think that you still own the minerals. It would be both parties responsibilities to carefully read the lease before signing. I would reread the entire contract again to make sure this mineral rights issue was not included in the body of the lease.


Steve:

Sorry, I meant contract instead of lease. My opinion is still the same.
steve moore said:

Thanks - it wasn't a lease, it was a contract for sale. Perhaps that's what you meant. Let me know if you still have the same opinion. Thanks again.

charles s mallory said:

Steve:

If the contract only addresses the transfer of water rights and not specifically mineral rights, I would think that you still own the minerals. It would be both parties responsibilities to carefully read the lease before signing. I would reread the entire contract again to make sure this mineral rights issue was not included in the body of the lease.

You might want to have the contract looked at. In most instances, it is construed that minerals do indeed convey to the purchasing party unless you have specific wording in your deed transfer that the minerals are to be retained by the selling party.

Thanks, Charles. What is the correct way to verify this? Do I engage an attorney or are there search firms that do this kind of research? Is there some standard “proof of rights” document that is available? Have a great weekend.

steve moore said:

Thanks - it wasn't a lease, it was a contract for sale. Perhaps that's what you meant. Let me know if you still have the same opinion. Thanks again.

charles s mallory said:

Steve:

If the contract only addresses the transfer of water rights and not specifically mineral rights, I would think that you still own the minerals. It would be both parties responsibilities to carefully read the lease before signing. I would reread the entire contract again to make sure this mineral rights issue was not included in the body of the lease.

Here's a few links with further explination/info on mineral conveyance:

http://mountainlawgroupblog.com/2011/01/19/oil-and-gas-leasing-in-colorado-severable-estates/

http://www.andrews-barth.com/publications.asp?a=16

Not to be the bearer of bad news, but unless you had express wording in the deed/contract stating that your intention was to reserve your mineral rights at the time of sale, then those minerals would have been transfered along to your buyer when you sold the surface rights. In that absence of an express mineral reservation, the minerals are coveyed along with the surface.


DJG said:

You might want to have the contract looked at. In most instances, it is construed that minerals do indeed convey to the purchasing party unless you have specific wording in your deed transfer that the minerals are to be retained by the selling party.

Agreed with DJG.

DJG said:

Here's a few links with further explination/info on mineral conveyance:

http://mountainlawgroupblog.com/2011/01/19/oil-and-gas-leasing-in-c...

http://www.andrews-barth.com/publications.asp?a=16

Not to be the bearer of bad news, but unless you had express wording in the deed/contract stating that your intention was to reserve your mineral rights at the time of sale, then those minerals would have been transfered along to your buyer when you sold the surface rights. In that absence of an express mineral reservation, the minerals are coveyed along with the surface.


DJG said:

You might want to have the contract looked at. In most instances, it is construed that minerals do indeed convey to the purchasing party unless you have specific wording in your deed transfer that the minerals are to be retained by the selling party.

According to my Warranty Deed; if the seller was not going to convey the mineral rights to me the buyer, it would be stated on the "TO HAVE AND TO HOLD" clause. This was a 2004 Colorado transaction.

1. Assuming you acquired the mineral rights when you bought the property (i.e. the seller had those rights to convey at the time); then when you sold it later, the terms of the contract for sale is merged (legally superceeded) into the deed of conveyance, and that document controls what you actually granted to your buyer.

2. The granting language in the deed (i.e. Grantor grants, bargains, sells and conveys...), is then enforced along with any warranties of title included the deed. The Grantee is legally recognized to have acquired all you represented (in the deed) to have granted them (and warranted, if it was a Warranty Deed), less what you expressly reserved.

3. So, unless you included an express reservation of (some or all) of the mineral rights in the deed (including reservations of any mineral rights previously reserved in the chain of title), any rights you owned in those lands passed to the buyer/grantee of the property.