MacMaster v. Onstad’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 15 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘This decision suggests that the class of minerals conveyed by a mineral deed is limited to those which are valuable, are not a part of the soil and may be mined without destroying the surface. To the same effect is Eldridge v. Edmondson, Tex.Civ.App., 252 S.W.2d 605 .’ ””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Atwood v. Rodman · Guinn v. Acker

2. ““In considering mineral severance by deed, we should consider for a moment what minerals are so severed. Instruments of conveyance or of reservation most commonly used in the State of North Dakota refer to ‘all oil, gas and other minerals in and under and that may be produced. . . . ’ Early decisions were concerned with whether the term ‘minerals’ included oil and gas. The Majority rule is that while the intention of the parties as indicated by a consideration of the language of the whole instrument must control, the term ‘minerals’ as used in real property instruments includes oil and gas unless a contrary intention or an ambiguity is manifest by the language of the instrument as a whole. More important at the present time is the question of whether or not the grant of ‘oil, gas and other minerals’ includes coal. “Present North Dakota statutory law provides that: No conveyance of mineral rights or royalties separate from the surface rights in real property in this state, excluding leases, shall be construed to grant or convey to the grantee thereof any interest in and to any gravel, coal, clay or uranium, unless the intent to convey such interest is specifically and separately set forth in the instrument of conveyance. [Section 47-10-24, N.D.C.C.] Thus the question as to whether or not coal is included in a conveyance of ‘minerals’ arises only by virtue of instruments dated prior to July 1, 1955.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Reiss v. Rummel

3. ““[The lessor does] lease and let exclusively unto said lessee with the exclusive right of mining, exploring by geophysical and other methods, and operating for and producing therefrom oil, gas, casinghead gas, casinghead gasoline, and all other minerals.” 86 N.W.2d 36, at 39 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Reiss v. Rummel