Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

THE ,*~ORNEY GENERAL OFTEXAS Mi-.0;J.S: Ellingson Gyeral Manager Texas Prison System Huntsville, Texas Dear Sir: Opinion Ro. O-3357 Ri: DOW lessee of vendor under a-~ deed reserving minerals have the right of ingress and agress'for the purpose of exploiting such minerals? This will acknowledge receipt of your letter-of March 29, requesting the opinion of this Department. We quote your letter In full as follows: "Mr; Ray Chapman, Auditor of the Texas Prison Bgatem, advises he adliveha to you the ae8a to the Blue Ridge State Farmwhich reserves to Mr. Bassett Blakely, vendor, the mineral rights. "Recently a man by-the name of Richards set up a derrick and other equipment for sinking a shaft to operate a salt mine on the Edward Drew Survey which comprises part of the Blue Ridge State Farm purchased from Mr. Bassett Blakelg. "Please refer to the deed In your possession and advise if Nr. Richards after entering into a lease with Mr. Blakelg would have a right to move In on this property without consulting the prison system and if your an- swer Is yes, Would we have a rLght to all damages sustained or would the necessary damages for the op- eration of a salt mine be exempted?" We wrote you that the deed to which you refer in your letter was not In our posssesslon and requested thatwe be furnished with a copy thereof. A copy of this deed was enclos- ed in your letter of April 18th, receipt of which we acknowledge. This deed contal.nsa mineral reservation and we quote the following pertinent excerpt: "It IS further agreed and understood that the Mr. O.J.S. Ellingson, page 2 O-3357 said Bassett Blakely does not convey by this in- strument any of the 011, gas or minerals upon, in or under sala land. .....The grantor, his as- signs and leasees, shall have the right of ingress and egress in the lands herein conveyed for the purpose of exploiting the said lands for oil, gas and other minerals, but such right shall be exer- clsed in such a way as to occasion no unnecessary damage, either to the surface of said lands or to any growing crops thereon, and all actual damages occasioned by the exercise of said rights shall be paid to the Prison Commission." In view of this express provision in the deed by which the prison system acquired title to the land, there can be no questlon that the vendor's lessee has the right to enter upon the land to exploit the mineral estate, Even in the absence of such a stipulation in the deed, under the Texas law the owner of the mineral estate is gLven the right of ingress and egress for the purpose of exploring and developfng. Donnell v. Otts (Civ. App., Ft. Worth, 1921), 230 3-W. 864. "The law is well settled in this state that. the lessee (under a mineral 1ease))has the right'oi possesslon of any part of the surface of the land as may be reasonablg,,necessargfor development and ex- ploration, United North and South Of1 Co. v. Mercer (Civ,'App:, Austin, 1926) 286 S,w. 652S However, under the provisions of Article 6166g'(Vernon's Ann. St.) the Texas Prison Board is given the exclusive manage- ment and control of the prison system and all its propertles. As we understand your inquiry, the property in question constitutes a part of a prison farm, and we realize that there might be some conflict between the authority of the Prison Board over the land and the rights of the owner of the mineral estate to extract the minerals. MeLther the prison officials nor the owner of the miner- al estate may wantonly disregard the rights of the other upon the surface of the land in question: "It has been sald that there is an implied contract between the owner of the surface estate and the owner of the oil and gas that each ~111 exercise his right In such a manner asto avoid Injuring the other. 31 Tex. Jur. 559. See also Humble 011 & Refining Co, v. Wood MR. O.J.S. Ellingson, page 3 0 -3357 (Corn.App. Sec. B, 1927) 294 S.W. 197. The situation as you have outllned it appeals to us as one which might be equitably adjusted between the parties through consultation. We do not believe that the right of the prison officials to require that entry upon the land in question be such as ~~111 not interfere with the conduct of the prison farm can be questioned. Such requirements mst, of course, be reasonable and such as will not substantially interfere with the right of the owner of the mineral estate to develop such estate. Answering the latter portion of your inquiry, we wish to point out that the deed provides that "all actual damane occasioned by the exercise of the right (to extract the minerals) shall be paid to the Prison Commission." Trusting that we have sufficiently answered your in- quiry, we are Yours very truly ATTORNEY GENWAL OF TRXAS .~ By s/Peter Maniscalco Peter Manlscalco Assistant PM:AMM:wc APPROVRCIWAY 14, 1941 s/Grover Sellers FIRST ASSISTART ATTORWEY GRRRRAL Approved Opinion Committee By s/GRL Chairman