Trulson, et al. v. Meiers, et al.

Docket No. 20190035
Oral Argument: Thursday, September 5, 2019 10:45 AM

Docket Info

Title
Curtis R. Trulson and Lesley D. Trulson, Plaintiffs and Appellants
v.
John Anthony Meiers, Jean R. Meiers,
Evan J. Meiers and Lauren B. Meiers, Defendants and Appellees
Case Type
CIVIL APPEAL : OIL, GAS AND MINERALS
Appeal From
Case No. 2017-CV-00088
North Central Judicial District, Mountrail County
Todd L. Cresap

Parties' Statement of Issues

  • Appellant

    The District Court erred in determining that the royalty deed dated June 28, 1982 was not a valid conveyance of a royalty interest in minerals in and under the subject property, and in quieting title in those mineral interests in the Defendants.

  • Appellee 1

    A. The District Court did not consider parole evidence and properly concluded the subject royalty deed was not delivered.
    B. The District Court property applied the law to conveyance in quieting title of the subject property in favor of the Meiers in not applying or considering the Duhig Rule.
    C. The District Court did not err in quieting title to the subject property in all defendants based on Plaintiff’s failure to establish delivery by a preponderance of the evidence.


Summary

Curtis and Lesley Trulson appeal after the district court ruled a deed from John and Jean Meiers did not convey a mineral royalty interest to the Trulsons.

In January 1982, the Meiers sold a quarter of land in Mountrail County to the Trulsons. The deed from the Meiers stated no minerals were conveyed to the Trulsons. At the time of the conveyance, the Meiers owned a royalty interest in one-half of the minerals under the property. In a June 1982 royalty deed, the Meiers conveyed one-half of their royalty interest in the minerals to the Trulsons. The royalty deed was not notarized and was not recorded until December 2008.

In April 2017, the Trulsons sued the Meiers claiming an interest in the Meiers’ mineral royalty interest. The Trulsons argued the Meiers conveyed a mineral royalty interest under the royalty deed. The Meiers argued that because the royalty deed was not notarized, it was not a valid conveyance. The Meiers also claimed they did not remember delivering the deed to the Trulsons. After a bench trial, the district court ruled the royalty deed was not a valid conveyance of a mineral royalty interest.

On appeal, the Trulsons argue the district court’s decision relating to the royalty deed was wrong.


Briefs

Filing Date Description
05/13/2019 APPELLANT BRIEF View
06/12/2019 APPELLEE BRIEF View
06/25/2019 REPLY BRIEF View

Counsel

Party Type Name
APPELLEE PRIVATE PRACTICE Erin Maureen Conroy - 05932
APPELLANT PRIVATE PRACTICE Erich M. Grant - 07593

(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)

Seq. # Filing Date Description Attachment
1 02/01/2019 NOTICE OF APPEAL : 02/01/2019
2 02/01/2019 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 02/06/2019
3 02/06/2019 Rec'd $125 filing fee
4 02/07/2019 NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.
5 02/07/2019 Notice served on Erich M. Grant, Jon W. Backes and Erin M. Conroy
6 02/28/2019 ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED FEBRUARY 27, 2019 (ENTRY NOS. 1-26, 28-109)
7 03/05/2019 ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED AUGUST 21, 2018
8 03/05/2019 C.O.S. OF TRANSCRIPT
9 04/10/2019 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF
10 04/10/2019 E-mail from Appellee's Counsel - no obejection to extension
11 04/10/2019 ACTION BY CLERK - Granted : 05/13/2019
12 05/13/2019 APPELLANT BRIEF View
13 05/16/2019 Oral Argument Request by Appellant
14 05/13/2019 APPELLANT APPENDIX
15 05/16/2019 Rec'd $52.00 for ATA (104 extra pages) (receipt #27067)
16 05/20/2019 Rec'd 6 copies of ATB back from Central Duplicating
17 05/20/2019 Rec'd 6 copies of ATA back from Central Duplicating
18 05/20/2019 Rec'd $25.00 for ATB e-filing surcharge (receipt #27076)
19 06/12/2019 APPELLEE BRIEF View
20 06/17/2019 Rec'd 6 copies of AEB from CSD
21 06/19/2019 Rec'd $25 e-filing surcharge for AEB
22 06/25/2019 REPLY BRIEF View
23 06/27/2019 Rec'd 6 copies of RYB from Central Duplicating
24 08/02/2019 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT