Sibert v. Kubas
North Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
PEDERSON, Justice.
The dispositive issue in this case is whether or not a grantee’s constructive notice of a third-party interest in minerals alone precludes application of the Duhig doctrine. 1 We hold that it does not, and we affirm the judgment quieting title to the designated property, the surface and one-half of the minerals, in the defendants (collectively referred to as Kubas).
It is undisputed that the State of North Dakota owns a one-half interest in the minerals by virtue of a statutory reservation explicitly recited in a properly recorded 1952 deed. The State is not a party to this…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Duhig v. Peavy-Moore Lumber Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1940
- Ell v. EllNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1980
- Schuh v. Allery Ex Rel. AlleryNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1973
- Schulz v. HauckNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1981
- Gilbertson v. CharlsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Nichols v. GoughnourNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
- Gawryluk v. PoynterNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002
- Acoma Oil Corp. v. WilsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
- Kukla v. KuklaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
- Mau v. SchwanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.