Non producing mineral rights

Ms. Bradley Apodaca · 2013-05-30T21:43:56Z

The deed itself gives the right of engress and egress via the bundle of rights. 2) Caselaw: "It is a well established doctrine from the earliest days of the common law that the right to the minerals carries with it the right to enter and extract them, and all other such incidents thereto as are necessary to be used for getting and enjoying them. This common law right was created 'because a grant or reservation of minerals would be wholly worthless if the grantee or reserver could not enter upon the land in order to explore for and extract the minerals granted or reserved.' Although the mineral estate is the dominant estate, the rights implied in favor of the mineral estate are to be exercised with due regard for the rights of the surface owner . . . . The burden of proof to show that the use of the surface by the (mineral estate's)lessee is not reasonably necessary is upon the surface owner. " Tarrant County Water Control & Improvement Dist. No. 1 v. Haupt , 854 S.W.2d 909, 911 (Tex. 1993) (internal citations omitted). To determine if the mineral is extractable and if the site picked by the geologist is suitable for a rig, a preliminary exploration of the property is necessary and appropriate. No, I will not drive over your wheat crop. No, I will not chase your cattle with a 4wheeler....but access - cannot be reasonably denied in most cases. "Courts recognized the dominance of those holding mineral rights over surface owners who held deeds in which the mineral estates had been cut away" This does not give license to wander on other's property, but as part of the assessment, exploration, etc of a mineral interest, I've never had any problem explaining why and what I am doing there and getting access...on occasion, my former employer did have to get the sheriff to escort them into a property, but I was never directly involved in any such instance. My bold below This was from a Tex DA The allegation, at least as it's currently understood by our office, is that the mineral owner is entering the land in ways and for reasons not related to production. Essentially, mineral owner wants to just come out and ride around the land because he enjoys the peace and quiet (and because it pisses the surface owner off). Because of that, the surface owner wishes to bar the mineral owner from entry. It's my understanding that any entry to the surface estate by the mineral estate owner MUST be a) connected to production and b) reasonable . Also the Colorado Bar website has an interesting download on conflicts and the reasonable accommodation of the surface owner... It is a two way street. The surface owner cannot create a subdivision on top of a mineral estate that does not allow for development of the mineral interest.

Oil and Gas Leasing Help

show post in topic

Home
Categories
Guidelines
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy

Powered by Discourse, best viewed with JavaScript enabled