Schucht v. Bedway Land, 2017 Ohio 1254

Plaintiffs (Schucht family) own ~526.79 acres of surface estate in Harrison County, Ohio; mineral rights had been severed and Bedway Land acquired the minerals by deed in 1984.
Plaintiffs sued in 2012 seeking a declaration that the severed mineral rights were abandoned and had vested back to the surface under the 1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act (ODMA).
Defendants (Bedway Land, Eric Petroleum, Chesapeake) asserted they held valid mineral interests and filed summary judgment motions; plaintiffs conceded they did not follow the 2006 ODMA procedures.
The trial court applied both the 1989 and 2006 ODMA, treated certain prior deeds/leases as “savings events,” and granted summary judgment to defendants (finding minerals not abandoned).
On appeal, the court held the 1989 ODMA is inapplicable to claims asserted after the 2006 Act’s effective date; because plaintiffs brought their claim in 2012 and did not comply with the 2006 Act’s notice/filing requirements, summary judgment for defendants was nevertheless proper.
The appellate court remanded to correct clerical errors regarding the precise fractional mineral interests and recording citations in the judgment entry.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 1989 ODMA can be applied to a 2012 abandonment claim	1989 ODMA governs and minerals are abandoned under its standards	1989 ODMA is inapplicable to claims asserted after the 2006 amendment	1989 ODMA inapplicable to post-2006 claims; plaintiffs must follow 2006 procedures
Whether plaintiffs complied with the 2006 ODMA notice/filing requirements	1989 analysis sufficient; no need to follow 2006 procedures	Plaintiffs did not serve notice or file affidavit as required by 2006 ODMA	Plaintiffs did not comply with R.C. 5301.56(B),(E); failure defeats abandonment claim
Whether prior deeds/leases and other events were “savings events” under 1989 ODMA	Certain 1983–1984 instruments and leases did not interrupt abandonment	Those instruments and leases qualify as title transactions/savings events	Court declined to reach these 1989-Act fact disputes as controlling because 2006 Act governs claims filed in 2012 (1989 issues rendered moot)
Whether clerical errors in the judgment entry should be corrected	Plaintiffs noted incorrect fractional-interest and recording citations	Defendants agreed errors existed	Remanded for correction: adjust Bedway’s interest (7/8 on ~36 acres; 8/8 elsewhere) and fix recording volume/page/date errors

Albanese v. Batman, 148 Ohio St.3d 85 (2016) (surface owner's failure to serve notice and file affidavit required by 2006 ODMA precludes abandonment under the amended statute)