CALVERT v. SWINFORD, 2016 OK 104

Plaintiffs (sisters Lisa Calvert and Teresa Roper) sold real property in Noble County but intended to retain mineral interests; deeds were recorded without reservations.
Approximately 12 years after recording, plaintiffs discovered the mineral interests were not reserved and sued for negligence and reformation against the Kansas attorney (Randee Koger) and his law firm (Bremyer & Wise, LLC), among others.
Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing the claims were time-barred by the applicable statutes of limitations because the grantors had constructive notice when the deeds were filed.
The trial court granted summary judgment for the lawyer and law firm, concluding the deeds, once filed of public record, started the limitations period for any reformation or negligence claims.
The plaintiffs appealed; the Oklahoma Supreme Court retained the cause to decide whether a grantor’s statute of limitations begins to accrue upon filing of the deed with the county clerk.
The Court held the accrual rule announced in Calvert v. Swinford, No. 114,957 (2016 OK 100), governs: the limitations period begins when the deed is filed and the grantor receives constructive notice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
When does the statute of limitations for a grantor’s negligence/reformation claim accrue after a deed is executed that allegedly failed to reserve mineral interests?	Plaintiffs argued summary judgment was premature because factual disputes exist about when the limitation period began (implying discovery or actual notice governs).	Defendants argued the limitations period accrued when the deed was filed of public record because filing gives constructive notice to the grantor.	The Court held the limitations period accrues when the deed is filed with the county clerk; constructive notice starts the clock, so claims were time-barred and summary judgment affirmed.

No officially reported authorities with Bluebook reporter citations were cited in this opinion; the decision relies on the Court’s companion unpublished/recently decided transfer, Calvert v. Swinford, No. 114,957 (2016 OK 100), as controlling precedent.