Legal Opinion

Reep v. State

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 26, 2013No. 20130110, 20130111PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SANDSTROM, Justice.

[¶ 1] Several owners of land next to navigable waters in North Dakota appeal from summary judgments determining the State owns the mineral interests under the land in the shore zone, the area between the ordinary high and low watermarks of the navigable waters. We conclude that the State owned the mineral interests under the shore zone of navigable waters upon statehood in 1889 under the equal footing doctrine and that the enduring language of the anti-gift clause now found in N.D. Const, art. X, § 18, precludes construing the language now codified in N.D.C.C. § 47-01-15 as…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. Shively v. BowlbySupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  3. Illinois Central Railroad v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  4. Pollard's Lessee v. HAGANSupreme Court of the United States · 1845
  5. Barney v. KeokukSupreme Court of the United States · 1877

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Sorum v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2020
  2. State v. HolbachNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2014
  3. Sorum v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API