Dils Co. v. Garrett

• Decision Date: 18 October 1956
• Docket Number: No. 3422,3422
• Citation: 294 S.W.2d 730
• Parties: DILS COMPANY, Appellant, v. Mattie GARRETT et al., Appellees.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

Page 730

294 S.W.2d 730

DILS COMPANY, Appellant, v. Mattie GARRETT et al., Appellees.

No. 3422.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, Waco.

Oct. 18, 1956.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 8, 1956.

Bracewell, Tunks, Reynolds & Patterson, Houston, for appellant.

Dawson & Dawson, Corsicana, for appellees.

McDONALD, Chief Justice.

This case involves the construction of a mineral deed dated 7 December 1921, to determine the interest acquired by the grantee. Prior to 30 December 1920 plaintiffs' predecessors were owners in fee simple of the 151 acre tract of land in Navarro County involved in this case. On 30 December 1920 plaintiffs' predecessors executed an oil and gas lease in the usual form to one Humphreys, which provided that he receive 7/8 of the oil and gas produced, and that lessors receive 1/8 of same as royalty. Such lease was in full force and effect on 7 December 1921, but thereafter, and prior to this case, had expired by its own terms. On 7 December 1921 plaintiffs' predecessors as grantors executed an instrument designated as a 'Mineral Deed', conveying to one Caldwell the interest now owned by defendant in the 151 acre tract here involved. Plaintiffs now stand in the shoes of their predecessors in title and defendant now stands in Caldwell's shoes. Pertinent portions of the mineral deed follow:

'Mineral Deed

'The State of Texas

County of Navarro

Know All Men By These Presents:

'That C. S. Garrett and wife, Mattie Garrett, both of Navarro County, Texas, for and in consideration of the sum of Fifteen Thousand Dollars cash in hand paid by J. Mentor Caldwell, hereinafter called Grantee, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, have granted, sold, conveyed, assigned and delivered and by these presents do grant, sell, convey, assign and deliver unto the said Grantee and undivided one sixty-fourth interest in and to all of the oil, gas and other minerals in and under, and that may be produced from the following described land: (Description follows)

'Together with the right of ingress and egress at all times for the purpose of mining, drilling and exploring said land for oil, gas and other minerals, and removing the same therefrom.

'Said land being now under an oil and gas lease executed in favor of I. B. Humphreys or his assigns, it is understood and agreed that this sale is made subject to the terms of said lease, but covers and includes one-eighth of all of the oil royalty, and gas rental or royalty due and to be paid under the terms of said lease.

'It is understood and agreed that one-eighth of the money rentals which may be paid to extend the term within which a well may be begun under the terms of said lease is to be paid to the said Grantee and in event that the above described lease for any reason becomes cancelled or forfeited, then and in that event an undivided one-eighth of the lease interest and all future rentals on said land for oil, gas and other mineral privileges shall be owned by said Grantee, he owning one-eighth of one-eighth of all oil, gas, and other minerals in and under said lands, together with one-eighth interests in all future rents.

'To have and to hold the avove described property * * *.

'Witness our hands this 7th day of December, 1921.

'C. S. Garrett

'Mattie Garrett.'

(There follows statutory acknowledgment and recordation certificate).

The only issue in this case is the construction of the foregoing mineral deed so as to determine the nature of the interest acquired by Caldwell and now owned by defendant. Both plaintiffs and defendant agree that the instrument is subject to construction from its own four corners. Plaintiffs contend that the instrument conveys only 1/64 of the minerals to Caldwell (and defendant) even after the termination of the Humphreys lease of 20 December 1920. Defendant, on the other hand, contends that the instrument construed in its entirety effects a conveyance to Caldwell (and defendant) of 1/8 of the minerals under the tract (after termination of the Humphreys lease).

The Trial Court, without a jury, held that the mineral deed under review conveyed to defendant 1/64 of the minerals under the land; 1/64 of the royalties; and 1/8 of bonus moneys and delay rentals. From the foregoing the defendant appeals, contending 1) that the mineral deed conveys 1/8 of the minerals under the tract 2) that the mineral deed conveys 1/8 of the royalties payable under existing and future leases on the property.

Analyzing the mineral deed itself, we observe:

The State of Texas

County of Navarro

Know All Men By These Presents:

1) That grantor grants, sells, and conveys to grantee an undivided 1/64 interest in the oil, gas, and minerals of the land in question, together with the right of ingress and egress to drill and remove same.

2) The land is under oil and gas lease to I. B. Humphreys and it is understood that this sale is made subject to the terms of said lease, but covers and includes 1/8 of all oil royalty due and to be paid under the terms of said...