surface.
Wherever the mineral or other interests in or rights appurtenant to land in this state have
passed, or shall hereafter pass, in any way, from a claimant in possession of the surface of
the land, the continuity of the possession of such mineral, interests and rights shall not be
deemed thereby to have been broken; but the possession of the surface by the original
claimant thereof, from whom such mineral, interests or rights passed, or by those
claiming through or under him, or by virtue of a judgment against him in an action to
which the holder of the mineral, interests or rights is not a party, shall be deemed to be for
the benefit of the person, his heirs and assigns, to whom the mineral, interests or rights
have passed.
Effective: October 1, 1942
History: Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky.
Stat. sec. 2366a-1.
Notes of Decisions
Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. v. Consol of Kentucky, Inc., 15 S.W.3d 727 (Ky. 2000).
· cites it 10× “However, the Circuit Court never reached the facts supporting TCO's claim of prescriptive *731 possession, but granted summary judgment to Consol on the basis of KRS 381.430. III. THE STATUTORY TRUST. KRS 381.”
Akers v. Baldwin, 736 S.W.2d 294 (Ky. 1987).
· cites it 2× “2d 943 (1980); see KRS 381.430 (1972). [7] The doctrine of severability exists in all jurisdictions except Louisiana, 4 D.”
Great W. Land Mgmt., Inc. v. Slusher, 939 S.W.2d 865 (Ky. 1997).
· cites it 4× “The trial court found, and the issue was not appealed, that the Stewarts are the record title owners of the mineral estate underlying the Knox County property.”
Florman v. MEBCO Ltd. P'ship, 207 S.W.3d 593 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).
“” MEBCO argues that the Moodie defendants’ argument regarding dominant versus subservient estates has no application to this issue, but rather the statutory reference cited by the Moodie defendants applies to adverse possession and has nothing to do with dominant or subservient…”
Sellars v. Ohio Valley Trust Co., 248 S.W.2d 897 (Ky. Ct. App. 1952).
“We conclude, therefore, that the oil and gas were conveyed, and that Sellars’ heirs have no right, title or interest in the minerals, including the oil and gas, if any, or the right to explore and recover the same.”
Ward v. Woods, 310 S.W.2d 63 (Ky. Ct. App. 1958).
“KRS 381.430 provides that possession of surface of land shall be deemed to be for the benefit of the owners to whom the mineral interests or rights in the land have passed.”
White Log Jellico Coal Co. v. Zipp, 32 S.W.3d 92 (Ky. Ct. App. 2000).
“) KRS 381.430. In order to repudiate or avoid the role of trustee and thus to claim the mineral rights by adverse possession, a claimant must demonstrate the same elements underlying adverse possession of land.”
Bigge v. Tallent, 539 S.W.2d 288 (Ky. 1976).
“The consequences of the body of law governing ownership of mineral estates and surface estates clearly mandate that the nondevelopment of a mineral estate by the holder of a lease on the minerals does not work a forfeiture for the benefit of an owner of the surface estate.”
Inland Steel Co. v. Isaacs, 291 S.W.2d 522 (Ky. Ct. App. 1956).
“The evidence pertaining ' to' -that claim revealed ■possessio'n only of the surface. We have *525 held consistently that after a severance of the minerals from the surface any- adverse possession of the surface will be deemed to be a holding in trust for the mineral owner unless…”
Card Creek Coal Co. v. Cline, 204 S.W.2d 571 (Ky. Ct. App. 1947).
“One of the grounds urged by appellant for reversal is that the tax deed and the leases by the Clines to Rowe are champertous under KRS 381.430. This statute is applicable only as between the owner of the surface and the owner of the minerals, or those claiming under them, and…”
Knott Coal Corp. v. Kelly, 417 S.W.2d 253 (Ky. Ct. App. 1967).
“The mineral deeds, creating the severance, were recorded before 1919.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.