International Salt Co. v. Geostow
| Decision Date | 12 October 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. Civ. 87-1501L.,Civ. 87-1501L. |
| Citation | 697 F. Supp. 1258 |
| Parties | INTERNATIONAL SALT COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. GEOSTOW, a Limited Partnership, Geostock New York Holdings, Inc., Northeastern Waste Services, Inc., Bear Development Company, Inc., James Hagan, William Selden, Cynthia Selden, and William Austin Wadsworth, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of New York |
Kenneth A. Payment, Rochester, N.Y., for plaintiff.
Gregory Photiadis, Frank T. Gaglione, Buffalo, N.Y., Richard Vullo and Donna Katos, Rochester, N.Y., for defendants.
DECISION AND ORDER
This is a diversity action brought pursuant to Article 15 of the New York Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law to quiet title. In Count 1 of its complaint, the plaintiff seeks a declaration from this court, pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 and Article 15 of the New York Real Property and Proceedings Law, of its rights under certain deeds to the use and ownership of the mining or containing chamber created by its salt mining operation in Retsof, New York.
The only matter before the court is plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as to Count 1 of its complaint, and for dismissal of all affirmative defenses and counterclaims raised by the defendants. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as to Count 1 is granted consistent with this decision.
For more than one hundred years, the plaintiff, International Salt Company ("Salt Company"), and its immediate predecessor in interest, the Retsof Mining Company, have engaged in underground salt mining in and around Retsof, New York. The Retsof Mine, as it is referred to, is the world's largest underground salt mine. The present mining operation is conducted on one level only, approximately 1060 feet below the surface of the ground. The mine consists of one chamber that extends for miles in all directions.
The mining activities of the Salt Company and its predecessors at the Retsof Mine have historically included only "first mining", using the pillar mining method by which it horizontally extracts salt leaving large pillars of salt throughout the mine for structural support. These pillars of salt range in size from 40 to 75 feet wide and from 80 to 200 feet long and create a honeycomb effect throughout the mine. Although the parties dispute the present technological feasibility of mining these salt pillars (so-called "pillar robbing" and "pillar shaving"), there is no dispute that a substantial portion of the original salt deposit remains in these pillars. Plaintiff and defendants agree that approximately one-third of the original salt deposits at this level, or, as stated by plaintiff, approximately fifty-five million tons of salt (Affidavit of Arthur Geary, sworn to April 6, 1988 hereafter "Geary Affidavit") remain in the pillars and floor and ceiling of the containing chamber.1
As the salt is removed, a containing chamber or mining cavity is created. That chamber is approximately 10 to 12 feet high ) and is contained entirely within the salt deposit laying approximately 1060 feet below the surface. The roof and floor of the chamber are comprised of salt. In the more recent mining excavations, the thickness of the floor and ceiling are approximately 1 to 2 feet; in older areas of excavation, the thickness is somewhat greater ).
The Salt Company has apparently conducted only first mining and only with respect to the salt lying approximately 1060 feet below the surface of the ground. Other salt deposits appear to exist both above and below this level and have yet to be mined ).
Active mining extraction operations occur at selected points on the perimeter of the mine. The workers enter the mine at the Fuller Shaft (Plaintiff's Exhibit F map), which is the mine's principal shaft. Plaintiff maintains a number of other shafts that are used for purposes of ventilation and escape. An extensive series of roadways is maintained in the mining chamber by which the workers travel back and forth to the active mining faces. The crushed salt that is extracted is transported to the Fuller shaft by means of miles of conveyor belts. Plaintiff maintains a sophisticated ventilation system, which it contends utilizes all parts of the mine for airflow.
Over the years, the Salt Company, or its predecessor, has acquired by means of deed conveyances certain subsurface rights from various surface property owners, including the predecessors-in-title to the individual defendants Hugh Hagan (Hagan), William and Cynthia Selden (Seldens), and William Austin Wadsworth (Wadsworth). The extent and nature of these subsurface interests is the principal issue in this case.
The Salt Company acquired over the course of many years certain subsurface interests in the individual defendants' properties by virtue of deed conveyances to it and to its predecessor in interest from the prior owners in interest of the individual defendants.
1. Selden Property. The Salt Company, or its predecessor in interest, acquired certain subsurface rights under the Selden property by virtue of six separate conveyances, the pertinent language of which is set forth in the Appendix accompanying this Decision (Appendix, pp. 1270-73).
Those interests not directly conveyed to the Salt Company were subsequently conveyed to it by its predecessor in interest.
2. Wadsworth Property: The Salt Company acquired its subsurface rights under the property now owned at the surface by defendant Wadsworth by virtue of a deed from Wadsworth's predecessors-in-interest, William P. and Martha S. Wadsworth, executed March 7, 1952 (Appendix, p. 1273).
3. Hagan Property: The Salt Company acquired its subsurface rights under the property now owned at the surface by defendant Hagan by virtue of three deeds in favor of the Salt Company's predecessor-in-interest, the pertinent language of which is set forth in the Appendix to this Decision (Appendix, pp. 1273-74).
The Retsof Mining Company subsequently conveyed its rights, title and interests under these deeds to the Salt Company.
Although each deed must be examined separately, the common focus of this case is on the meaning of the phrase "all mines, veins, seams and beds of salt". Most of the deeds contain the same, or for purposes of this discussion, equivalent, language as that contained in the granting clause in the executor's deed of March 3, 1952 from James W. Wadsworth, Jr., to the International Salt Company:
the party of the first part, ... does hereby grant and release onto the party of the second part, its successors and assigns forever, all mines, seams, veins and beds of salt and any other commercial mineral product already found, or which may hereafter be found, together with a perpetual and unrestricted right to the party of the second part, its successors and assigns to mine and remove the salt and other minerals herein conveyed by any subterranean process without liability of any kind or form to the owners of the surface....
In 1987, the Geostow defendants (Geostow, Geostock New York Holdings, Inc. "Geostock", Northeastern Waste Services, Inc. "Northeastern", and Bear Development Company, Inc. "Bear") announced a plan to store incinerator ash in certain portions of the Retsof Mine that they contend are mined-out. To implement this plan, the Geostow defendants sought to acquire from the surface owners their interests in the mining chamber created by the extraction of salt by the Salt Company.
In November of 1987, defendant Wadsworth gave defendant Bear a quit claim deed purporting to convey all right and title to property lying below 420 feet above sea level, excepting all mineral rights, and "subject to the rights International Salt Company may have in the premises, if any" (Plaintiff's Exhibit B to the Complaint). This conveyance of subsurface property includes that portion of the Retsof Mine located under Wadsworth's land.
On September 21, 1987, defendant Hagan entered into an option agreement with Bear Equipment & Rental, Inc., an affiliate of defendant Bear. Under the terms of this agreement, Hagan granted Bear Equipment the exclusive option to purchase "all of the seller's right, title and interest in and to" certain real property located in the Town of York (Defendant's Exhibit B to the Affidavit of Brian F. Swartzenberg hereafter "Swartzenberg Affidavit"). This option agreement does not refer to any subsurface rights or rights of the plaintiff or defendant Hagan in the mining chamber, and does not allude to the proposed development by the Geostow defendants.
On or about June 26, 1987, the defendant Wadsworth, acting as agent for Bear, entered into a purchase and sale contract with the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Staples v. Palten
...doubtful." Russell Motor Car Co. v. United States, 261 U.S. 514, 519, 43 S.Ct. 428, 430, 67 L.Ed. 778 (1923); International Salt Co. v. Geostow, 697 F.Supp. 1258 (W.D.N.Y.1988), aff'd, 878 F.2d 570 (2d Cir.1989). The formalistic application of this rule should be avoided. Russell Motor Car ......
-
International Salt Co. v. Geostow
...Property Actions and Proceedings Law (McKinney 1979). The opinion of the district court dated October 12, 1988 is reported at 697 F.Supp. 1258 (W.D.N.Y.1988). In Count I of the complaint, International Salt sought a declaratory judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2201 (1982) with respect to......
-
INTEGRATED WASTE SERV. v. AKZO NOBEL SALT
...and that it presently had the exclusive right to use and enjoy the chamber created by the mining operations. International Salt Co. v. Geostow, 697 F.Supp. 1258, 1270 (W.D.N.Y.1988). I also held, however, that Akzo did not have a fee simple absolute estate in the containing chamber created ......
-
Integrated Waste Services, Inc. v. Akzo Nobel Salt, Inc.
...Akzo were previously determined by this court in International Salt Co. v. Geostow, 878 F.2d 570 (2d Cir.1989), affirming 697 F.Supp. 1258 (W.D.N.Y.1988) (Larimer, J.). We there held that the original grants of mineral rights to Akzo's predecessor gave it fee simple ownership of all the sal......
-
CHAPTER 10 BUILDING YOUR OWN UNDERGROUND GAS STORAGE PROJECT: FROM LEASING TO OPEN SEASON UNDER FERC ORDER 636
...Rights and Interests," 46 La. L. Rev. 871 (1986). [55] 808 S.W. 2d 262 (Tex. Ct. App. 1991). See also Int'l Salt Co. v. Geostow, 697 F. Supp. 1258 (W.D.N.Y. 1988) (salt cavern created by mining belonged to fee owner of salt layer, not surface owner, where deed to owner of salt layer include......
-
Legislating Carbon Sequestration: Pore Space Ownership and Other Policy Considerations
...inject saline to the detriment of mineral rights, even where state permit for saline injection had issued); Int'l Salt Co. v. Geostow, 697 F.Supp. 1258 (W.D.N.Y. 1988) (mined chamber in salt formation belonged to surface estate, but could not be used until abandonment or exhaustion of the m......