Sorenson v. Alinder
2011 ND 36
| N.D. | 2011Background
- Johnsons, surface owners, seek to quiet title to mineral interests in Bottineau County; Taliaferro, record owner since 1950, last used mineral interest under a 1960 lease.
- No statement of claim recorded by Taliaferro; notices of lapse published July 2009.
- Notices mailed July 30, 2009 to Taliaferro at address of record (510 Petroleum Building, Abilene, TX); Taliaferro did not receive.
- Notices recorded September 11, 2009; quiet title suit filed January 14, 2010; service on Taliaferro in Abilene.
- District court quieted title in Johnsons, held no reasonable inquiry required where address appeared of record.
- Taliaferro appealed; Supreme Court affirmed, holding 38-18.1-06 requires reasonable inquiry only if address not on record and that 2009 amendments cannot retroactively defeat vested rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §38-18.1-06 requires reasonable inquiry when address appears of record | Johnsons contend no reasonable inquiry is needed | Taliaferro contends reasonable inquiry is required | No; only when address is not on record. |
| Whether the 2009 amendments' reasonable inquiry requirements apply retroactively to vested rights | Johnsons argue vested rights predate amendments; retroactivity not allowed | Taliaferro argues amendments apply to quiet title actions | Retroactive application not allowed; vested rights preserved, affirming judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sorenson v. Felton, 2011 ND 33 (N. Dak. 2011) (addresses inquiry scope under prior and current law)
- Hasper v. Center Mut. Ins. Co., 2006 ND 220 (N. Dak. 2006) (summary judgment de novo review; statute interpretation is law)
- Wheeler v. Gardner, 2006 ND 24 (N. Dak. 2006) (statutory interpretation as a question of law)
- White v. Altru Health Sys., 2008 ND 48 (N. Dak. 2008) (retroactivity and vested rights principles)