Reed v. Wylie

I would hold that the surface owner, Mrs. Reed, is entitled to judgment as a matter of *180law. This is for the reasons stated in my former dissenting opinion1 and for the additional reasons stated herein with respect to the opinion of the Court this day substituted for its opinion of May 25, 1977. This separate and additional dissent is directed solely against the following sentences on page six of the new majority opinion:

“. . . Furthermore, the rule of construction does not favor the surface owner simply because it is shown that the substance ‘may’ be produced by strip or pit mining. Instead,…