each conveyed the property, they owned an existing real-property interest in unaccrued royalties from the production of oil and gas. This interest could properly be severed from both the surface and the mineral estate and, therefore, their property
rights in the partial interest to the oil and gas were absolute. As such, the Court held that the W. T. Fleahman Interest and the Mary Fleahman Interests were not life estates and did not terminate on their respective deaths.
Authors:
William J. O’Brien Jr. MEMBER
Andreah S. Riedel ASSOCIATE Andreah Riedel’s practice includes abstracting for oil and gas title opinions, preparing easements for oil and gas clients, and drafting title opinions for drilling operations to commence.
Bill O’Brien focuses his practice in the areas of energy and mineral law. Mr. O’Brien is a trusted advisor to the land departments of oil and gas exploration and production companies and serves as one of the leaders of the firm’s Division Order Title Opinion team. Phone: (412) 504-8026 Email: bill.obrien@steptoe-johnson.com
Phone: (304) 230-2351 Email: andreah.riedel@steptoe-johnson.com
Ohio Supreme Court Further Clarifies ‘Reasonable Diligence’ Standard under the Ohio Dormant Mineral Act
Ohio
On March 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of Ohio issued its decision in Fonzi v. Brown and Fonzi v. Miller , Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-901, discussing the level of due diligence required of a surface owner to provide notice to a severed mineral interest owner in order to abandon said mineral interest under the Ohio Dormant Mineral Act (DMA). The court held that surface owners did not exercise reasonable due diligence when they failed to conduct a public record search in the county where the last known mineral interest holder resided, despite having knowledge of the same. These cases concern two adjoining parcels of land located in Monroe County, Ohio. For both parcels, prior deeds within the chain of title identified that the severed mineral interest holder, being Elizabeth Henthorn Fonzi (Fonzi), resided in Finleyville, Washington County, Pennsylvania. The surface owners, being appellants Gary D. Brown, Allen B. Miller, M. Craig Miller, and Brenda Thomas, subsequently began the process to have the Fonzi mineral interests declared abandoned. In doing so, their attorney searched the Monroe County
public records and conducted “limited Internet searches,” but failed to uncover any information about Fonzi or any potential heirs to send notice by certified mail. Therefore, the surface owners published notices of intent to declare the Fonzi mineral interests abandoned in a Monroe County newspaper, and subsequently filed affidavits of abandonment. The Fonzi heirs then filed complaints in the Monroe County trial court for declaratory judgment, seeking to quiet title, alleging that the surface owners had failed to exercise reasonable due diligence in attempting to locate the holders of the Fonzi mineral interest. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the surface owners in both cases, holding that the surface owners had made reasonable efforts to locate the potential Fonzi heirs. The Seventh District Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s decision in both cases, instead finding that the surface owners failed to conduct any search outside Monroe County when the surface owners knew that Fonzi lived in Washington County, Pennsylvania, at the time the reservations were made. On September
12
N at i onal A ssociation of D i v i s i on O rder A nalys t s
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs