Avery v Hoskins, Inc., 4th Court of Appeals, March 30, 2016, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 3202

Siblings who held divided interests in the surface of the ranch partitioned their mineral estates in such individual tracts and then pooled the royalty interests in such tracts. The court held that such a pooling did not result in the interest of the surface owner in the royalty interest of the other separate tracts being an interest that was appurtenant to such interest as to be conveyed by a general warranty deed.

Rose Quinn partitioned the surface estate of the 2,471.8 acre Quinn Ranch and conveyed portions to her three children. She subsequently conveyed an undivided mineral interest in the entire Quinn Ranch to such children. The children entered into a Sibling Agreement in which they partitioned the mineral estate the same as the surface and then pooled the royalty interest in the three tracts. The House parties acquired the interest of Sam Quinn by general warranty deed that conveyed Sam’s interest and all “appurtenant” interests.

The court ruled that the mineral interests Sam had in his two siblings’ tracts were not appurtenant to his tract and a general warranty deed that did not specifically convey such interest would not convey such interests. Thus, the royalty interest in the siblings’ tracts remained with Sam Quinn.