*1 MOORCROFT, Wyoming, OF TOWN (Defendant), Appellant, Company, a former Nebras (dissolved August corporation, ka any in in and all successors executors, administrators, heirs,
terest, (Defend assigns thereof
trustees and
ants), LANG, Hays,
Gladys H. Robert D. (Plaintiffs). Hinz, Appellees Evelyn J. COMPANY, a former LAND
LINCOLN (dissolved corporation, Au Nebraska
gust and all successors executors, interest, heirs, administra
tors, assigns Ap thereof trustees and (Defendants),
pellants Moorcroft, Wyoming,
Town of
(Defendant), LANG,
Gladys Hays, H. D. Robert (Plaintiffs). Hinz, Appellees Evelyn J. 87-182,
Nos. 87-183.
Supreme Wyoming. Court of
Sept. Granted, 1, 1988.
Rehearing Nov. Sundance, Cundy, A. and Harlan A.
Cecil S.D., Schmidt, appellant Lin- Spearfish, Co. coln Land Dumbrill, Hughes Hughes L. & Mark Sundance, appellant Town of Moor- croft. Morgan, Brorby, D. Roberts of
Thomas Roberts, Gillette, appellees. Price & *2 BROWN, C.J.*, THOMAS, 25, 1901, through filing plat the of a Before and CARDINE, URBIGKIT, JJ., County, Wyoming. Following and Crook the KALOKATHIS, Judge. plat, filings initial two additional were des- District filings ignated. These occurred on Febru-
KALOKATHIS, Judge. District 4,1904, 8,1920. ary May Following and on appeal granting areas, platting This is an from an order of these title was trans- summary appel- of the through favor by warranty ferred Lincoln deed lees, and purchasers, whose abuts streets to individual lot the successors (Town). It alleys assigns appellees the Town Moorcroft and of whom are herein. rights ownership 6, of mineral plat May 1901, concerns The filed stated that “as originally dedicated as streets by surveyors under land said certifi- indicated and alleys cate, streets, of Moorcroft. The Town that avenues * * * rights contestants for these mineral include hereby are dedicated to the dedicator, Town, original warranty conveyed by use.” The deeds (Lincoln) Land and the purchasers Lincoln to the individual lot did except estate, landowners. not reserve or a mineral in- oil, cluding gas hydrocar- and associated dispute The arose over claims asserted bons. rights underlying property mineral West, North, Township Range 6th granted On March the Town an P.M., County, Wyoming, 6: Crook Section oil and lease to Buckhorn Petroleum 3, of the of Moor- Company, company, Lot now Town a Colorado croft, Wyoming. by all leased of the lands owned the Town 10, April summary judgment moved for on “including all lots or controlled owned town, 1987. The trial court found that the abut- public parks, city dump, two ting in in- alleyways or their successors cemetery, and all streets and qjj wag terest, possessed ownership a fee in a min- .” discovered beneath the eral estate under streets and question. pro- surface of the area in originally grant- ducing question designated dedicated to the Town and well was finding ed motion. From this their “Gill 3-6 Oil Well.” appeal. and Lincoln 30, 1986, a of lot On October number rights hold remain We lots owners whose abutted original complaint dedicator. the Town filed a streets within declaratory judgment the district court for following presents The Town issue: quiet They certify moved to title. oil, gas Who owns the and other minerals 23, under W.R.C.P. matter as a class action alleys, parks, etc. to the Town and to and notice was sent within the town limits of the Town of 1986, the trial Lincoln. On November Moorcroft, among adjoin- Wyoming, gave notice of the class action and court owners, ing lot dedicator and rights On November to class members. Town of Moorcroft and should separate filed Lin- answer was ruling of this court in the case of claiming right, title or interest coln all oil, gas hydrocarbons and associated (Wyo.1985) be overturned. in and under the streets and other minerals as: Lincoln states the issue alleyways. Lincoln claimed developer, or the Whether the the Town color of a warran- the mineral estate under oil, gas adjoining lot owners own the July which con- ty deed dated interests other mineral oil, exception tained no or reservation alleys of Town of Moor- hydrocarbons or other gas or associated croft? separate filed A answer was minerals. seeking originally plat- a declaration that it be question The area in was the Town of all by appellant April adjudged the true and lawful owner ted as a town Lincoln on * Retired June pursuant A oil, other associated dedication is one gas, coal and the terms of the and is almost under the streets and
hydrocarbons found
universally
filing and re-
created
originally been dedi-
alleyways which had
cording
plat.
A common-law dedica-
by Lincoln.
cated to the
requires
tion
an intention to dedicate ex-
court characterized
Town’s
The trial
form,
pressed
acceptance
some
easement
in the streets or
interest as an
proper public
of the dedication
possessory
found that
alleyways and
*3
authorities,
by general public user.
It
or
in
rights
underlying minerals were
to the
distinguishable
is
from a
dedi-
abutting property
The trial
owners.
cation,
grant,
which is in the nature of a
conveyances of
court also noted that
prescription
from
is based on
property
Lincoln to
own-
from
Generally
long period of use.
a com-
for
no reservation
ers contained
upon
mon-law dedication rests
the doc-
any mineral interest.
claims that
estoppel. Statutory
trine of
dedication
possessory
affect its
the dedication did not
legal
generally vests the
title to the
estate
interest
in the mineral
grounds
apart
public purposes
set
alleyways and
the dedicated streets and
municipal corporation,
the com-
while
rights
to the
argues that
it retained
legal
mon-law method leaves the
minerals,
and-gas.1
oil
original
owner.
ownership to the min-
The Town asserts
Wyoming,
In
dedication at common law
34-12-104,
eral estate
virtue of W.S.
municipality.
an easement
in the
creates
acknowledgment and
which states that the
Gay
Johnson’s
Au
We stated
“equivalent to
recording
plat
of a
a deed
Co.,
City Chey
tomotive
Inc. v.
Service
portion
premis-
simple
in fee
of such
of the
enne,
Wyoming, 367 P.2d
(Wyo.
788
platted
apart
es
as is on such
set
* *
public
or other
Addi-
law,
Under common
at dedication the
tionally,
urges
this court to over-
Town
public municipality acquires
or
an ease-
City
Evanston v.
rule its
alleys,
ment
the streets and
Robinson,
(Wyo.1985),
proprietor
fee remains in the
municipality acquires
which held that a
no
abutting owner.
[Citations.]
oil, gas
interest
in the
or other minerals
accomplished by
re-
The dedication
underlying the streets as a result of the
acknowledgment
plat in
cording and
of the
recording
acknowledgment
of a subdi-
governed by
namely
this case was
plat.
ar-
vision
Wyoming,
1402 of Revised Statutes
§
gue
granting summary judg-
that the order
recording
decreed the
1887. That section
properly
ment as
decided in their favor and
simple
plat “equivalent to a deed in fee
should be affirmed.
platted.”
of such
Act,
Platting
present
and Dedication
Dedication
land for use
through
is vir-
W.S. 34-12-101
public may
occur either
virtue of com
early
tually identical to that
statute.
through
McQuil
mon
law
statute.
E.
lin,
33.03,
Municipal Corporations,
p.
under
have held
dedication
We
§
(3d
1983),
simple
distinguishes
statutory language,
ed.
these
a fee
deter-
this
between
types of
in the surface is created.
It en-
two
dedication:
minable2
subject
rights
simple
should
An estate in fee
which is
to a
1. It
be noted that the mineral
(defined
23),
conveyed by
special
§
the lots
Lincoln to the
limitation
a condi-
(defined
24),
subsequent
landowners are not at issue in this
an exec-
§
tion
utory
(defined
25)
important
It is
decision.
also
note that the
or a combi-
§
limitation
initially
were
dedicated to
Restatement of
nation of such restrictions.
public
use and were never
Property,
p.
§
landowners.
such
estate
The determinable character of
expiration
includes both
and divestment.
Id.
determinable,
simple
The estate created under the statute at issue
2. An estate in fee
also
defeasible,
simple
simple
called an
this case is a fee
determinable
estate in fee
is de-
because, upon
any platted
fined as
surface
vacation
property
compasses
exploi
area of dedicated
Revenues from such mineral
alleys and rea-
apart
may ultimately
public,
for streets and
tation
“set
benefit
and so
sonably
includes
the surface
especially
if retained
the Town. How
necessary
as is
ever,
much of the subsurface
public
retention of funds does not
municipal
services.”
street construction
meet
use test.
See 11 E.
Evanston,
P.2d at 1289.
McQuillin, supra,
32.29a at 350-352.
appropria-
Dedication is the intentional
Since the revenues derived from the
proper
some
tion of land
the owner to
qualify
minerals and oil and
do not
as a
public use. The intention of the owner to
“public use”
property,
for the use of
set aside lands
compelling
no
depart
there is
reason to
life of
is the foundation and
from the doctrine of stare decisis and over
every dedication.
[Citation.]
Mills
Phoenix
Landrum &
(Wyo.1985),
P.2d
urges.
as the Town
Co.,
Realty
Ariz.
P.2d
simple
The fee
determinable that
*4
acquired when Lincoln dedicated streets
of
is vital to a dedication
to
[I]t
alleyways
public
specially
for
use was
public use that
it is to
forever and
be
language
34-12-104,
limited
of W.S.
acceptance,
after
and that it
irrevocable
requires
public
continuous
use.
public
McQuillin,
be for a
use.
E.
concept
public
Since the
of
use is inconsist
33.02 at 636.
attempt
exploit
ent with an
to
Thus,
pub-
dedication is the concomitant of
profit,
estate for
dedication did
public
generally
lic use. Dedication for
operate
not
to transfer
that estate. The
ground
involves such matters as use of
for
abutting
any rights
landowners did not lose
cemeteries, schools, highways, bridges and
parcels
to the minerals
their
parks.
pp. 407-
26 C.J.S. Dedication §
because,
applicable
under the
(1956).
We cannot assume that dedi-
to the mineral estate remained in Lincoln.
property, subject
exploita-
cated
to mineral
city
The trial court determined that “[a]
tion,
public
meets the
of
criterion
use.
oil,
acquire
or
does not
an interest in
town
Early case
did
law
not see fit to include
or minerals
the streets or
meaning
“public
within the
of
use” an at-
pursuant
34-12-104],
to [W.S.
tempt
exploit
A
the mineral estate.
acquires
so much of the surface
Colorado case held that
necessary
is
and subsurface as
for street
purpose
the intent and
of our
is to
statue
municipal
construction and
services.” We
city
governmental capaci-
clothe
its
agree
with this
of the order. How-
ty
such,
with entire title to the
as
ever,
finding
based on this
and our discus-
'profit
use and not
or
above, summary judgment
favoring
sion
city.’
plainly
emolument of the
It was
abutting
is
landowners
reversed. The
part
intention of
the dedicator to
with
trial court is instructed to enter
property only
the title to so much of its
County
Land and
on behalf
necessary
pur-
as was
to effectuate the
Company
Title
or its successors and as-
pose
establishing
certain streets and
signs.
alleys designated
and described
city
use and to clothe the
Justice,
THOMAS,
dissenting.
with the absolute title thereto for that
purpose only,
and not to vest it with
Although
complete
I
not in
accord
am
may
estate
interest
ores that
exist
decision,
for its
I would
with the rationale
* *
thereunder
*.
court in this case.
Its
affirm
district
Co.,
Mining
abutting
landowners
Leadville v. Bohn
conclusion that
(1906).
lying under the streets
37 Colo.
86 P.
own the minerals
1965);
(Wyo.
alleyways,
W.S.
streets or
the
Town loses all
34-12-104.
Laramie,
property.
Payne City
See
v.
Wyoming.
is
If
of Moorcroft
This
is the law in
Wyoming
law
the Town
eminently correct under
of Moorcroft were to vacate
jurisdictions.
from other
recognized
alleys,
abutting
law
dedicated streets and
opin
majority
Except
the extent that
landowners
title to the sur
would receive
Robin
ion reaffirms
34-12-109, W.S.1977;
face estate. Section
son,
declining
(Wyo.l985),
highway, alley, carries title way grantor
center of the if the owns so
much, contrary unless an intention to the
sufficiently appears.” 12 Am.Jur.2d