Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
29 Ohio opinions name it 3 courts 1876–2026 9 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Ricelli v. Atkinsongreen2 sentences2023As a result, the terms employed, in and of themselves, do not definitively establish whether an exception or a reservation has been created. * * * Thus, ‘whether the language creates a reservation or an exception depends upon the intention of the parties as evinced by a construction of the whole instrument in light of the circumstances of the case rather than upon the particular words used.’ Id. at 179 [ 58 O.O. 305 , 132 N.E.2d 123 ], citing Gill v. Fletcher (1906), 74 Ohio St. 295 [ 78 N.E. 433 ]; Akron Cold Spring Co. v. Unknown Heirs of Ely (1923), 18 Ohio App. 74 . ‘In case of doubt, it i 2023As a result, the terms employed, in and of themselves, do not definitively establish whether an exception or a reservation has been created. * * * Thus, ‘whether the language creates a reservation or an exception depends upon the intention of the parties as evinced by a construction of the whole instrument in light of the circumstances of the case rather than upon the particular words used.’ Id. at 179 [ 58 O.O. 305 , 132 N.E.2d 123 ], citing Gill v. Fletcher (1906), 74 Ohio St. 295 [ 78 N.E. 433 ]; Akron Cold Spring Co. v. Unknown Heirs of Ely (1923), 18 Ohio App. 74 . ‘In case of doubt, it i | 4 | 5 |
Pure Oil Co. v. Kindallgreen2 sentences2022Further, the conveyance at issue contained words of inheritance, see id. at 191 , so the difference between a reservation and an exception was of no consequence to our analysis in that case. {¶ 26} However, there is a recognized difference between royalties that have accrued, which are personal property, and the right to unaccrued royalties, which is real property. 2007Applying this rule, an exception or reservation in a conveyance is construed in favor of the grantee rather than of the grantor.’ Pure Oil Co. v. Kindall (1927), 116 Ohio St. 188, 203 [ 156 N.E. 119 ], quoting 2 Tiffany, Real Property (2 Ed.Rev.1920), Section 437.” Campbell v. Johnson (1993), 87 Ohio App.3d 543, 547 , 622 N.E.2d 717 . {¶ 76} When reading this deed as a whole, given the vast rights the deeds grant to the coal estate, we find that the reservation was truly intended to be a reservation and not an exception. | 3 | 6 |
Sloan v. Lawrence Furnace Co.green2 sentences2020Sloan v. Lawrence Furnace Co., 29 Ohio St. 568, 569 (1876). {¶85} In Gill, the grantor conveyed the property while “reserving the one-half of the plaster or the profits thereof which may hereafter be found on said land” and the deed then described the conveyance by parenthetically adding, “the half of plaster as above described only excepted.” Although the deed initially said “reserving” and failed to use words of inheritance, the Court noted the deed also used the word “excepted” and found: it can only mean that the grantor excepted out of the estate granted and retained in himself the fee si 2017See also Sloan v. Lawrence Furnace Co. , 29 Ohio St. 568 (1876), syllabus ("The words 'reserving all the minerals underlying the soil,' in the granting clause of a deed for the conveyance of real estate, constitute, prima facie, an exception of the minerals from the operation of the grant.") {¶ 22} Similarly, Appellants seem to acknowledge the use of a certain word or phrase (such as "subject to") does not per se establish there was no exception or reservation. | 3 | 3 |
Gill v. Fletchergreen2 sentences2023As a result, the terms employed, in and of themselves, do not definitively establish whether an exception or a reservation has been created. * * * Thus, ‘whether the language creates a reservation or an exception depends upon the intention of the parties as evinced by a construction of the whole instrument in light of the circumstances of the case rather than upon the particular words used.’ Id. at 179 [ 58 O.O. 305 , 132 N.E.2d 123 ], citing Gill v. Fletcher (1906), 74 Ohio St. 295 [ 78 N.E. 433 ]; Akron Cold Spring Co. v. Unknown Heirs of Ely (1923), 18 Ohio App. 74 . ‘In case of doubt, it i 2023As a result, the terms employed, in and of themselves, do not definitively establish whether an exception or a reservation has been created. * * * Thus, ‘whether the language creates a reservation or an exception depends upon the intention of the parties as evinced by a construction of the whole instrument in light of the circumstances of the case rather than upon the particular words used.’ Id. at 179 [ 58 O.O. 305 , 132 N.E.2d 123 ], citing Gill v. Fletcher (1906), 74 Ohio St. 295 [ 78 N.E. 433 ]; Akron Cold Spring Co. v. Unknown Heirs of Ely (1923), 18 Ohio App. 74 . ‘In case of doubt, it i | 1 | 9 |
American Energy Corp. v. Datkuliakgreen1 sentence2026Datkuliak at ¶ 75 (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Detlor v. Hollandgreen1 sentence2026Oct. 27, 1986) (concluding that the following 1960 reservation did not include oil and gas: “all minerals, clay, and coal underlying the soil, subject only to the condition that the removal of said minerals, clay, and coal shall be without damage to the surface of said land except to provide air shafts and escape for mine water”). {¶ 21} In contrast to the use of words that are commonly associated with solid mineral extraction, the reservation clause does not use words that are commonly associated with extracting oil and gas—words and phrases such as “derricks,” “pipe lines,” “tanks,” “the use | 1 | 1 |
Oldham v. Fortnergreen2 sentences2025Id. at 740, 743 . {¶70} The court explained: “in general a grantor who makes a reservation or an exception in his deed does not part with the title to that which is thus excepted or reserved, and where not already outstanding in another necessarily remains with the grantor; and such an exception or reservation will be good as to property recited to have been previously sold or conveyed, although the recital is false.” Id. at 743 . 2025Id. at 740, 743 . {¶70} The court explained: “in general a grantor who makes a reservation or an exception in his deed does not part with the title to that which is thus excepted or reserved, and where not already outstanding in another necessarily remains with the grantor; and such an exception or reservation will be good as to property recited to have been previously sold or conveyed, although the recital is false.” Id. at 743 . | 1 | 1 |
McClellanv. McGarygreen1 sentence2023Senterra Ltd. v. Winland, 7th Dist. No. 18 BE 0051, 2019-Ohio-4387 , 148 N.E.3d 34 , ¶ 55, modified on recon., 7th Dist. Belmont No. 18 BE 0051 2019-Ohio-5458 , aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 , and aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 . {¶62} Relying on the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in Blackstone v. Moore, 155 Ohio St.3d 448 , 2018-Ohio-4959 , 122 N.E.3d 132, ¶ 9 , we found “the ‘root of title’ can contain a repetition of a reservation; the deed must merely account for the interest the person is claiming to have record marketable title to and not be the severance deed.” Senterra Ltd., supra; accord McClellan v. M | 1 | 1 |
Peppertree Farms, L.L.C. v. Thonengreen1 sentence2023The Court expressly stated that “the distinction between a reservation and an exception no longer carries the same historical importance in Ohio that it did prior to 1925.” Peppertree Farms, L.L.C. v. Thonen, 167 Ohio St.3d 52 , 2022-Ohio-395 , 188 N.E.3d 1061 (“Peppertree I”). | 1 | 1 |
McClellan v. McGary (Slip Opinion)green2 sentences2023Senterra Ltd. v. Winland, 7th Dist. No. 18 BE 0051, 2019-Ohio-4387 , 148 N.E.3d 34 , ¶ 55, modified on recon., 7th Dist. Belmont No. 18 BE 0051 2019-Ohio-5458 , aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 , and aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 . {¶62} Relying on the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in Blackstone v. Moore, 155 Ohio St.3d 448 , 2018-Ohio-4959 , 122 N.E.3d 132, ¶ 9 , we found “the ‘root of title’ can contain a repetition of a reservation; the deed must merely account for the interest the person is claiming to have record marketable title to and not be the severance deed.” Senterra Ltd., supra; accord McClellan v. M 2023Senterra Ltd. v. Winland, 7th Dist. No. 18 BE 0051, 2019-Ohio-4387 , 148 N.E.3d 34 , ¶ 55, modified on recon., 7th Dist. Belmont No. 18 BE 0051 2019-Ohio-5458 , aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 , and aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 . {¶62} Relying on the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in Blackstone v. Moore, 155 Ohio St.3d 448 , 2018-Ohio-4959 , 122 N.E.3d 132, ¶ 9 , we found “the ‘root of title’ can contain a repetition of a reservation; the deed must merely account for the interest the person is claiming to have record marketable title to and not be the severance deed.” Senterra Ltd., supra; accord McClellan v. M | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Noblegreen2 sentences2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 1 |
Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co.green1 sentence2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 1 |
Embleton v. McMechengreen2 sentences2022If the “conveyance create[d] an exception to the grant, leaving in the grantor and his heirs a fee-simple estate,” Gill at paragraph two of the syllabus, words of inheritance were not necessary to retain more than a life estate, id. at 304. {¶ 19} “Whether the language used in a deed creates a reservation or exception from the grant depends upon the intention of the parties as evinced by a construction of the whole instrument in the light of the circumstances of each case.” Id. at paragraph one of the syllabus. 2022If the “conveyance create[d] an exception to the grant, leaving in the grantor and his heirs a fee-simple estate,” Gill at paragraph two of the syllabus, words of inheritance were not necessary to retain more than a life estate, id. at 304. {¶ 19} “Whether the language used in a deed creates a reservation or exception from the grant depends upon the intention of the parties as evinced by a construction of the whole instrument in the light of the circumstances of each case.” Id. at paragraph one of the syllabus. | 1 | 1 |
Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp.green2 sentences2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 1 |
Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co.green1 sentence2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 1 |
Sehlstrom v. Sehlstromgreen1 sentence2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 1 |
| Morgan Woods Homeowners' Assn. v. Willsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Walker v. Fossgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Yoppolo v. Allen (In Re Allen)green | 1 | 1 |
| Little v. Lindergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Simpson v. Kistler Investment Co.green | 1 | 1 |
| Slidell v. Grandjeangreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Akron Cold Spring Co. v. Unknown Heirs of Ely
neutral
2 sentences2023As a result, the terms employed, in and of themselves, do not definitively establish whether an exception or a reservation has been created. * * * Thus, ‘whether the language creates a reservation or an exception depends upon the intention of the parties as evinced by a construction of the whole instrument in light of the circumstances of the case rather than upon the particular words used.’ Id. at 179 [ 58 O.O. 305 , 132 N.E.2d 123 ], citing Gill v. Fletcher (1906), 74 Ohio St. 295 [ 78 N.E. 433 ]; Akron Cold Spring Co. v. Unknown Heirs of Ely (1923), 18 Ohio App. 74 . ‘In case of doubt, it i 2021As a result, the terms employed, in and of themselves, do not definitively establish whether an exception or a reservation has been created. * * * Thus, ‘whether the language creates a reservation or an exception depends upon the intention of the parties as evinced by a construction of the whole instrument in light of the circumstances of the case rather than upon the particular words used.’ Id. at 179 [ 58 O.O. 305 , 132 N.E.2d 123 ], citing Gill v. Fletcher (1906), 74 Ohio St. 295 [ 78 N.E. 433 ]; Akron Cold Spring Co. v. Unknown Heirs of Ely (1923), 18 Ohio App. 74 . ‘In case of doubt, it i | 5 | 1993–2023 |
Campbell v. Johnson
green
2 sentences2007Applying this rule, an exception or reservation in a conveyance is construed in favor of the grantee rather than of the grantor.’ Pure Oil Co. v. Kindall (1927), 116 Ohio St. 188, 203 [ 156 N.E. 119 ], quoting 2 Tiffany, Real Property (2 Ed.Rev.1920), Section 437.” Campbell v. Johnson (1993), 87 Ohio App.3d 543, 547 , 622 N.E.2d 717 . {¶ 76} When reading this deed as a whole, given the vast rights the deeds grant to the coal estate, we find that the reservation was truly intended to be a reservation and not an exception. 2007Applying this rule, an exception or reservation in a conveyance is construed in favor of the grantee rather than of the grantor.’ Pure Oil Co. v. Kindall (1927), 116 Ohio St. 188, 203 [ 156 N.E. 119 ], quoting 2 Tiffany, Real Property (2 Ed.Rev.1920), Section 437.” Campbell v. Johnson (1993), 87 Ohio App.3d 543, 547 , 622 N.E.2d 717 . {¶ 76} When reading this deed as a whole, given the vast rights the deeds grant to the coal estate, we find that the reservation was truly intended to be a reservation and not an exception. | 4 | 2007–2023 |
Corder v. Ohio Edison Co.
green
1 sentence2026A possible alternative interpretation that “‘strain[s] ordinary usage or conflict[s] with the structure or purpose of the text as a whole,’ . . . is not reasonable and does not make the contractual text ambiguous.” (Bracketed text in original.) Id., quoting Corder v. Ohio Edison Co., 2020-Ohio- 5220, ¶ 38 (DeWine, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). {¶ 31} The majority opinion concludes—with a scant discussion of legal principles relating to ambiguity—that the deed’s reservation clause is unambiguous. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Tera, L.L.C. v. Rice Drilling D., L.L.C.
green
2 sentences2024The court of appeals’ decision states that Rice Drilling thereafter assigned a percentage of its leased mineral interest to appellant Gulfport Energy. 2023-Ohio-273 , 205 N.E.3d 1168, ¶ 8 . 2 January Term, 2024 (Emphasis added.) The relevant lease language reserving certain mineral rights to the lessor (originally Shaw, now Tera) (“the reservation clause”) reads: Lessor reserves all rights not specifically granted to Lessee in this Lease. 2024The court of appeals’ decision states that Rice Drilling thereafter assigned a percentage of its leased mineral interest to appellant Gulfport Energy. 2023-Ohio-273 , 205 N.E.3d 1168, ¶ 8 . 2 January Term, 2024 (Emphasis added.) The relevant lease language reserving certain mineral rights to the lessor (originally Shaw, now Tera) (“the reservation clause”) reads: Lessor reserves all rights not specifically granted to Lessee in this Lease. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Blackstone v. Moore (Slip Opinion)
green
2 sentences2023Senterra Ltd. v. Winland, 7th Dist. No. 18 BE 0051, 2019-Ohio-4387 , 148 N.E.3d 34 , ¶ 55, modified on recon., 7th Dist. Belmont No. 18 BE 0051 2019-Ohio-5458 , aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 , and aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 . {¶62} Relying on the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in Blackstone v. Moore, 155 Ohio St.3d 448 , 2018-Ohio-4959 , 122 N.E.3d 132, ¶ 9 , we found “the ‘root of title’ can contain a repetition of a reservation; the deed must merely account for the interest the person is claiming to have record marketable title to and not be the severance deed.” Senterra Ltd., supra; accord McClellan v. M 2023Senterra Ltd. v. Winland, 7th Dist. No. 18 BE 0051, 2019-Ohio-4387 , 148 N.E.3d 34 , ¶ 55, modified on recon., 7th Dist. Belmont No. 18 BE 0051 2019-Ohio-5458 , aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 , and aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 . {¶62} Relying on the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in Blackstone v. Moore, 155 Ohio St.3d 448 , 2018-Ohio-4959 , 122 N.E.3d 132, ¶ 9 , we found “the ‘root of title’ can contain a repetition of a reservation; the deed must merely account for the interest the person is claiming to have record marketable title to and not be the severance deed.” Senterra Ltd., supra; accord McClellan v. M | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Alexander v. Buckeye Pipe Line Co.
red
2 sentences2023The granting clause of the lease grants to the lessee the oil and gas rights “in the formations commonly known as the Marcellus Shale and the Utica Shale, * * * other than as reserved unto Lessor below.” In the subsequent reservation clause, the lessor reserves “any and all formations between the base of the Marcellus shale to the top of the formation commonly known as Utica Shale” and reserves “all formations below the base of the Utica Shale.” (2013 and 2014 Leases). {¶137} “[C]ommon words appearing in a written instrument are to be given their plain and ordinary meaning unless manifest absu 2023The granting clause of the lease grants to the lessee the oil and gas rights “in the formations commonly known as the Marcellus Shale and the Utica Shale, * * * other than as reserved unto Lessor below.” In the subsequent reservation clause, the lessor reserves “any and all formations between the base of the Marcellus shale to the top of the formation commonly known as Utica Shale” and reserves “all formations below the base of the Utica Shale.” (2013 and 2014 Leases). {¶137} “[C]ommon words appearing in a written instrument are to be given their plain and ordinary meaning unless manifest absu | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Senterra, Ltd. v. Winland
green
2 sentences2023Senterra Ltd. v. Winland, 7th Dist. No. 18 BE 0051, 2019-Ohio-4387 , 148 N.E.3d 34 , ¶ 55, modified on recon., 7th Dist. Belmont No. 18 BE 0051 2019-Ohio-5458 , aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 , and aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 . {¶62} Relying on the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in Blackstone v. Moore, 155 Ohio St.3d 448 , 2018-Ohio-4959 , 122 N.E.3d 132, ¶ 9 , we found “the ‘root of title’ can contain a repetition of a reservation; the deed must merely account for the interest the person is claiming to have record marketable title to and not be the severance deed.” Senterra Ltd., supra; accord McClellan v. M 2023Senterra Ltd. v. Winland, 7th Dist. No. 18 BE 0051, 2019-Ohio-4387 , 148 N.E.3d 34 , ¶ 55, modified on recon., 7th Dist. Belmont No. 18 BE 0051 2019-Ohio-5458 , aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 , and aff'd, 2022-Ohio-2521 . {¶62} Relying on the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision in Blackstone v. Moore, 155 Ohio St.3d 448 , 2018-Ohio-4959 , 122 N.E.3d 132, ¶ 9 , we found “the ‘root of title’ can contain a repetition of a reservation; the deed must merely account for the interest the person is claiming to have record marketable title to and not be the severance deed.” Senterra Ltd., supra; accord McClellan v. M | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Krone v. Lacy
green
2 sentences2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Arrington v. United Royalty Co.
green
2 sentences2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Callahan v. Martin
green
2 sentences2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Price v. Atlantic Refining Company
green
2 sentences2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Mark v. Bradford
green
2 sentences2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Siana Oil & Gas Co., LLC v. Dublin Co.
neutral
2 sentences2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 2022See, e.g., United States v. Noble, 237 U.S. 74, 80 , 35 S.Ct. 532 , 59 L.Ed. 844 (1915); Sehlstrom v. Sehlstrom, 925 N.W.2d 233, 238 (Minn.2019); Siana Oil & Gas Co., L.L.C. v. Dublin Co., 2018 ND 164 , 915 N.W.2d 134, ¶ 19 ; Weber v. Mobil Oil Corp., 2010 OK 33 , 243 P.3d 1, ¶ 19, fn. 25 ; 10 January Term, 2022 Nygaard v. Getty Oil Co., 918 So.2d 1237, 1240, ¶ 14 (Miss.2005); Ferguson v. Coronado Oil Co., 884 P.2d 971, 977 (Wyo.1994); Price v. Atlantic Refining Co., 79 N.M. 629 , 1968-NMSC-180 , 447 P.2d 509, ¶ 4 ; Krone v. Lacy, 168 Neb. 792, 800 , 97 N.W.2d 528 (1959); Mark v. Bradford, 315 | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Dixon v. Van Sweringen Co. green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Rubel v. Johnson
green
1 sentence2020Therefore, LVF argues that the Estate did not transfer the oil and gas rights in Tract One to the Wilts. {¶31} “Whether the language used in a deed creates a reservation or exception from the grant depends upon the intention of the parties as evinced by a construction of the whole instrument in the light of the circumstances of each case.” Rubel v. Johnson, 7th Dist. Monroe No. 17 MO 0009, 2017-Ohio-9221 , ¶ 21 quoting Gill v. Fletcher, 74 Ohio St. 295 , 78 N.E. 433 (1906). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Lighthorse v. Clinefelter green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| Duhig v. Peavy-Moore Lumber Co. green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| State v. Schmick neutral | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| State v. Green neutral | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Chartiers Block Coal Co. v. Mellon green | 1 | 2007–2007 |
| Drowry v. Bauer neutral | 1 | 1945–1945 |
| King v. Murphy green | 1 | 1945–1945 |
| Hasselbring v. Koepke green | 1 | 1945–1945 |
| Stotzenberger v. Perkins green | 1 | 1945–1945 |
| Towne v. Salentine neutral | 1 | 1945–1945 |
| Terry v. Tinsley green | 1 | 1945–1945 |
| Morrison v. First National Bank green | 1 | 1945–1945 |
| Pellissier v. Corker green | 1 | 1945–1945 |
| Paxton v. Benedum-Trees Oil Co. green | 1 | 1927–1927 |
| Craig v. . Wells green | 1 | 1926–1926 |
| Keeler v. Wood green | 1 | 1876–1876 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.