Waslaski v. State, 2013 ND 56

Edyth Christeson owned an undivided 1/8 mineral interest; surface was conveyed to Gilstads’ predecessors in 1964 while Edyth reserved the minerals.
Edyth died in 1983; Emmett Christeson became her sole heir and thus the mineral owner upon her death.
In 1989 Emmett and Eleanor Christeson executed and recorded an oil and gas lease on the mineral interest.
Emmett died in 2000, followed by Ronald in 2005; Patricia Christeson became the next claimant.
In 2007 the Gilstads published a Notice of Lapse of Mineral Interests under ch. 38-18.1 and mailed it to deceased owners; probate in 2011 determined the chain of ownership to Patricia.
In April 2011 Patricia and estates of Edyth, Emmett, and Ronald sued to quiet title; the district court held the 1989 lease was a “use” within 20 years, precluding abandonment; Gilstads appealed and this Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether recording a lease by a non-record owner constitutes use under 38-18.1-03(1)(d)	Gilstad contends the lease was not by the record owner.	Christeson holds the lease constitutes a use since recorded leases count as use.	Yes; lease constitutes use; abandonment not proven.

Bornsen v. Pragotrade, LLC, 804 N.W.2d 55 (2011 ND) (statutory meaning presumed and not rewritten by courts)
Wimbledon Grain Co., 663 N.W.2d 186 (2003 ND) (clear language governs statutory interpretation)
State v. Dennis, 733 N.W.2d 241 (2007 ND) (statutory meaning and intent.”)
Brigham Oil & Gas, L.P. v. Lario Oil & Gas Co., 801 N.W.2d 677 (2011 ND) (legislative distinction between record owner and legal owner)
Johnson v. Taliaferro, 793 N.W.2d 804 (2011 ND) (use of mineral interests under 38-18.1-02; twenty-year period)
Sorenson v. Felton, 793 N.W.2d 799 (2011 ND) (statutory abandonment framework)