Mueller v. Stangeland
North Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
ERICKSTAD, Chief Justice.
The issue in this appeal from a judgment in a quiet title action is whether or not a deed excepted or reserved a mineral interest in the grantor. The trial court concluded that the deed provision in question was an exception to the warranty and not a reservation of minerals. Judgment was entered in favor of the Stangelands. We affirm.
By warranty deed, Michael S. Kellar did “GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL AND CONVEY” unto Arnold K. Stangeland and Thomas M. Stangeland certain real property in 1944. The granting clause contained no language excepting or reserving any minerals. The…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Christman v. EminethNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1973
- Malloy v. BoettcherNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1983
- Royse v. Easter Seal Society for Crippled Children & Adults, Inc. of North DakotaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1977
3Cited by19 opinions
- Bismarck Realty Co. v. FoldenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
- Hamilton v. WollNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
- Johnson v. Mineral Estate, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. TresenriterNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
- Stracka v. PetersonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.