817 F. Supp. 2d 1049
E.D. Tenn.2011Background
- Plaintiffs John and Lisa Heineman own approximately 225 acres in Marion County, Tennessee, with mineral rights either owned or claimed by various parties over time.
- Sewanee Fuel & Iron Company reserved all minerals, including coal, oil, gas and any other minerals, with broad rights to mine and access the surface, in a 1928 deed that also reserved extensive rights of ingress and other rail and utility rights-of-way.
- Mineral rights on the property were ultimately acquired by Terra Enterprises, LLC, after a chain of transfers and tax sales, and in 2008 Melinda Stokes/S&S Stone entered into a mineral lease with Terra to mine fieldstone (sandstone) from the plaintiffs’ land.
- Defendants allegedly created a new road, damaged trees, and removed sandstone from Plaintiffs’ land, causing damage beginning around July 2008 and continuing into August 2008.
- Plaintiffs filed suit July 2, 2009, asserting six counts: quiet title, trespass, conversion, nuisance, negligence (and negligence per se), and gross negligence, along with Terra’s counterclaim for inducement of breach of contract and interference with a prospective economic advantage.
- The court eventually granted in part Plaintiffs’ summary judgment, holding sandstone is not a mineral under the 1928 deed, and granted relief on Counts One through Three, with Counts Four through Six remaining for trial and damages reserved for Counts Two and Three.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sandstone is a mineral under the 1928 deed | Sandstone is not a mineral; it lies near the surface and is not included in the mineral reservation. | Sandstone is a mineral and within the scope of the reservation because the deed uses broad language. | Sandstone is not a mineral; not part of the mineral reservation. |
| Quiet title interpretation of mineral rights vs surface rights | Minerals do not include sandstone, so Plaintiffs hold quiet title to the surface 71 acres. | Mineral rights encompass broader terms; ownership should reflect the reserved minerals. | Grant plaintiff summary judgment on Count One; quiet title to 71 acres owned by Plaintiffs. |
| Trespass on Plaintiffs’ land | Defendants trespassed by entering and disturbing Plaintiffs’ property outside the deed’s scope. | Entry may be within the deed’s rights if properly scoped to mineral extraction. | Plaintiffs win on Count Two; trespass established; damages to be determined later. |
| Conversion of sandstone | Defendants’ removal of sandstone constituted conversion of Plaintiffs’ property. | Removal was within Defendants’ mineral rights and permissible under the deed. | Plaintiffs prevail on Count Three; conversion established; damages reserved. |
Key Cases Cited
- Campbell v. Tenn. Coal, Iron & R.R. Co., 265 S.W. 674 (Tenn. 1924) (mineral interpretation must avoid destroying the conveyance)
- Soberay Mach. & Equip. Co. v. MRF Ltd., Inc., 181 F.3d 759 (6th Cir. 1999) (four-factor test for indispensable parties (Rule 19))
- Hart v. Craig, 216 P.3d 197 (Mont. 2009) (dictionary/common meanings of minerals and rocks inform deed interpretation)
- Doochin v. Rackley, 610 S.W.2d 715 (Tenn. 1981) (interpretation of deeds and intent in Tennessee law)