Legal Opinion

Ely v. Briley

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)

Decided January 29, 1998No. 03-97-00211-CVPublishedCited by 55 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CARROLL, Chief Justice.

In this case of first impression, we decide (1) whether a constructively severed mineral interest is subject to the doctrine of accretion, and (2) whether a deed reserving a one-half mineral interest to the grantor ceded the grantor’s right to future accretion to the grantee. Because we hold that a constructively severed mineral interest is subject to the doctrine of accretion, and that the deed in question did not limit the grantor’s right to future accretion, we will affirm the trial-court judgment.

THE CONTROVERSY

Since 1879, the tract of land in question was described…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Commissioners Court of Titus County v. AganTexas Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Oake v. Collin CountyTexas Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Altman v. BlakeTexas Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Barber v. Colorado Independent School DistrictTexas Supreme Court · 1995
  5. French v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by55 opinions

  1. Martin v. AmermanTexas Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Jerry Vernon v. William Perrien and Roxanne Perrien, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2012
  3. Koch v. TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2008
  4. Cherokee Water Co. v. Freeman, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2000
  5. Jordan v. Bustamante, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2005

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

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

Powered by the Exa API