Walker v. Shondrick-Nau
2014 Ohio 1499
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- John Noon purchased property in Enoch Township (1964) and reserved mineral rights in a 1965 deed.
- Surface rights were conveyed in 1970 and 1977 with deeds that expressly reserved mineral rights and referenced their recording volumes/pages.
- Appellee Jon Walker purchased the property in 2009 and the parcels total 37.042 acres and 5.186 acres.
- Appellee served a notice of abandonment of mineral interest on Dec. 2, 2011; Noon filed a preservation of mineral interest on Jan. 10, 2012.
- Plaintiff filed suit on Apr. 27, 2012 seeking quiet title and declaratory judgment that Walker owns the mineral rights; trial court granted summary judgment for Walker, concluding the 1970/1977 deeds were not savings events and the mineral rights were abandoned by 1992.
- Appellant Patricia J. Shondrick-Nau, as executrix/trustee, appeals the summary judgment ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 1970 and 1977 surface-deed transactions were savings events under R.C. 5301.56. | Walker contends the deeds’ mineral reservations were not subject of a title transaction, so no savings event occurred. | Noon/Executor argues the mineral interest was the subject of a title transaction and preserved. | No savings events found; the deeds did not transfer the mineral interest and thus do not save the mineral rights. |
| Whether the court should apply the 1989 version or the 2006 version of the Dormant Mineral Act. | Court should apply the statute in effect when action occurs, favoring 1989 version for vesting in 1992. | 2006 version should apply as the events occurred after its effective date and preservation was timely. | The 1989 version controls; the mineral interest vested in the surface owner in 1992 and was not saved by later amendments. |
| Whether retroactive application of the 1989 version violates the Ohio Constitution. | Retroactive application is argued under constitutional scrutiny. | Constitutional challenge not properly raised; prior law applies. | No plain error; constitutional challenge not considered. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dodd v. Croskey, 2013-Ohio-4257 (Ohio 2013) (discussed whether oil and gas interests can be ‘subject of’ a title transaction)
- Cadles of Grassy Meadows, II, LLC v. Kistner, 2010-Ohio-2251 (Ohio 2010) (retroactivity/retroactive application of dormant mineral act principles)
- Bartol v. Eckert, 50 Ohio St. 31, 33 N.E. 294 (1893) (Ohio 1893) (retroactivity analysis for amendments absent explicit retroactivity)
- State ex rel. Jordan v. Indus. Comm., 2008-Ohio-6137 (Ohio 2008) (defining vested rights and protection from impairment)
- Texaco v. Short, 454 U.S. 516 (U.S. 1981) (Supreme Court on retroactive Dormant Mineral Act considerations)