This case underscores Texas courts’ commitment to applying a four corners approach to deed interpretation as opposed to applying canonical rules of construction. However, it is important to observe that these traditional interpretation tools are not entirely abandoned, but merely relegated to “persuasive” authority. A thorough analysis of each provision of a deed and how it comports with other provisions remains a crucial exercise in Texas mineral titles. A petition for review of the Texarkana Court of Appeals’ decision was filed on October 27, 2021 and is currently pending before the Supreme Court of Texas. C ontact If you have any questions regarding this case law update or suggestions for topics to be covered in future issues, please call our office at 713-229-0360 or contact:
Christi 1981, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (citing Jones v. Sun Oil Co. , 110 S.W.2d 80 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1937, writ ref’d)); 9 and
A deed is construed “to confer upon a grantee the greatest estate that the terms of the instru- ment will permit,” Johnson v. Conner , 260 S.W.3d 575, 579 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2008, no pet.) (citing Lott v. Lott , 370 S.W.2d 463, 465 (Tex. 1963)). 10
Interestingly, the Court noted that although these customary “canons of construction” may remain persuasive in certain instances, they will not trump a modern holistic “four corners” analysis. In this case, however, the Court found that these canons of construction do not apply at all. This is because there was not an actual reservation in the 1967, but merely an interest that was held back and not purported to be conveyed. 11 The Court went on to note that T ex . P rop . C ode A nn . § 5.001(a) states that “[a]n estate in land that is conveyed or devised is a fee simple unless the estate is limited by express words or unless a lesser estate is conveyed or devised by construction or operation of law.” 12 Here, the Texarkana Court of Appeals focused on the fact that the 1967 Deed contained a metes and bounds description and “likewise” conveyed one-eighth of the oil, gas and minerals. 13 Per the Court, the Grantors’ clearly and unambiguously intended to convey something less than the fee simple estate. 14 Thus, under the “four corners” approach to deed interpretation and Section 5.001 of the Texas Property Code, only 1/8th of the minerals passed to the Dawson Parties under the 1967 Deed. 15
Brad Gibbs Partner, Houston bgibbs@kolawllp.com Eli Kiefaber Partner, Houston rkiefaber@kolawllp.com
Zachary Oliva Partner, Houston zoliva@kolawllp.com _________________________________________________ www.kolawllp.com The content of this publication and any attachments are not intended to be and should not be relied upon as legal advice or to create a lawyer-client relationship. © 2022 Kiefaber & Oliva LLP. All rights reserved. This publication may qualify as “Attorney Advertising” requiring notice in some jurisdictions. Houston (principal office): 815 Walker St., Suite 1140, Houston, Texas 77002, 713-229-0360 | Columbus: One East Livingston Avenue, Suite B, Columbus, Ohio 43215, 614- 349-4525.
9
Id. Id.
10 11 12 13 14 15
Id. at 4. Id. at 5. Id. at 1. Id. at 5. Id. at 6.
15
G r o w t h T h r o u g h E d u c a t i o n - J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y / M a r c h 2 0 2 2
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker