1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties
The 1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act has now been applied by 6 Judges in 6 different counties.
Tuscawaras - Wendt v Dickerson - Feb 21, 2013
Monroe - Eisenbarth v Reusser - June 6, 2013
Jefferson - Shannon v Householder - July 17, 2013
Columbiana - Bender v Morgan - March 20, 2013
Noble - Walker v Noon - March 20, 2013
Morgan - Wiseman v Potts - June 29, 2010
They have all concluded that it does apply when reviewing a title and that it was an automatic abandoning.
Go here to read the new decisions.
Views: 33866
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by m.jones on -
Where is it written static? The people that sold property without minerals or 1/2 minerals didn't pay for minerals and most of the people that sold property and did that, inherited the property and made money selling the property. They didn't pay separate price for minerals and property , they paid for the property and got minerals. People know they bought it that way but it doesn't mean they have to like it. If someone sells property the minerals etc. should go with property. The law is the law and if the mineral owners knew that they could keep the minerals and sell the property, they should have known to have an affidavit of preservation or have a tax ID # and pay taxes every 20 years on the minerals like the property owners have to pay property taxes. We have sold property many times over the last 30 years and have never kept mineral rights. Apparently over the years the people that reserved minerals didn't care about them to do the above savings events to preserve their rights.
-
Permalink Reply by ohioshale on
-
Too bad you didn't have the foresight to reserve the minerals.
The statute reads how it reads "in the preceding twenty years." It doesn't saying shifting or rolling or anything of the sort. Look at the 2006 act that repealed and amended the prior version. Read the concurrence in the last couple DMA cases in the 7th District. That is what will become the law. It doesn't matter what the legislature "may" or "may not" have intended, what matters is plain reading of the statute - that's how statutory interpretation works.
I suspect that, if you checked, most counties in severed county areas didn't have separate tax parcel identification numbers. And, as the Supreme Court will soon acknowledge, the repetition of a mineral reservation acts as an affidavit of preservation.
Look, I'm sorry that you didn't buy your minerals. Likely, you could have, and for very little at the time, I imagine. But it sounds like you didn't. You don't own them, and you never will.
-
Permalink Reply by Finnbear on
-
I was involved with a landowner group a couple of years ago and the checks I did showed that you are wrong. I was surprised to find numerous "minerals deeds" recorded with the counties. I didn't know such a thing existed before that time but I now believe they are the proper way for one to take and keep ownership of a severed mineral interest.
-
Permalink Reply by m.jones on
-
Yes I agree with you Finnbear. Too Ohioshale,We didn't want to keep the gas and mineral rights when we sold our properties because we feel it goes with the surface of land people bought, what is on or under the land should be theirs . The property we live on now we have the mineral rights the people that sold it to us didn't reserve them either. The people that reserved the minerals were greedy and if they knew they could keep the minerals then they should have been smart enough to have a savings event every preceding 20 years in order to keep them. If the surface owner pays tax on the surface the people owning minerals should have to pay taxes / have a parcel ID# just like land owners in order to keep them. If the surface owner does not pay the taxes every year they will loose their property.... .
-
-
I posted this earlier in the thread today, but I will copy and paste it because after reading some other responses I think it applies equally here:
In the final analysis, Ohio law is clear on one point, even if the original DMA was altogether ambiguous to the lay-man: forfeiture is an extreme outcome that will only be enforced if it's clear that was actually the legislature's intent. Since the legislature was surely aware of this time-honored canon of interpretation, why didn't they use the clear language available from the Indiana Lapse statute or the proposed Uniform Dormant Mineral Act? The verbal road-map to reunite mineral and surface by operation of law was there to be followed, and the General Assembly consciously decided to go in another direction. Presumably this is because it was not their intent to create a self-operating statute -- otherwise why re-invent the wheel? The 2006 DMA seems like clear remedial legislation that doesn't need to have retroactive effect to solve the confusion -- it simply 'shores up' the legislative language to make the inert nature of the statute abundantly clear to the average Joe. Which is how it should have been in the first place, out of basic fairness to property owners, prospective buyers, and title examiners.
-
Permalink Reply by Dexter Green on -
"If the surface owner pays tax on the surface the people owning minerals should have to pay taxes / have a parcel ID# just like land owners in order to keep them."
This is not a valid point because you're essentially saying that people should volunteer to pay a tax that doesn't exist in most counties.
"The people that reserved the minerals were greedy..."
1. No, they weren't. They sold a property minus an asset and were willing to take the risk that said asset would be something they could one day monetize.
2. Greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures, the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge, has marked the upward surge of mankind.
-
-
FYI Finbear: a 'mineral deed' is not a tax parcel identification number. The later would be found in the Auditor's Office.
-
Permalink Reply by m.jones on
-
Marc your correct they would be found in Auditors Office. That is what I thought Finnbear meant when called them mineral deeds.
-
Permalink Reply by Finnbear on
-
I know the difference between a deed found at the Recorder's Office and a Tax Parcel ID# used by the Auditor in collecting RE taxes. I did find listings with the county auditor for minerals only for some parcels but I never investigated as to if or how taxes were collected on those. I also had some land/mineral owners produce documents (deeds, I believe) showing ownership of minerals only, separate from the surface deed. Some of these were on farms where the surface and minerals were deeded separately, but owned by the same people and some were minerals owned by someone other than the surface owners. These mineral deeds were very similar in nature to the coal deeds that separated certain veins of coal away from the surface ownership on some of the lands I own in SE OH. They contained specific language like the coal deeds allowing access to the minerals even though the ownership was separate from the surface. I knew this sort of thing was done for coal, but prior to that time, I had never seen it done for other minerals.
-
Permalink Reply by marina blue on
-
I read all of your opinions... I understand there is blood in the water over all of this. Is the 1989 DMA null and void and the 2006 version is law???
Top Content
Latest Activity
- Top News
- Everything
pig dung replied to Theresa Kolk's discussion 'What's going on in your area?? any info???' in the group Tioga County, PA
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
