697 Hahn v. Gips, No. 13-16-00336-CV, 2017 WL 4837877 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi Oct. 26, 2017, no pet.)
Tuesday, August 28th, 2018
The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you.
Hahn v. Gips, No. 13-16-00336-CV, 2017 WL 4837877 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi Oct. 26, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.), held that a partition deed was unenforceable as to the mineral estate, because the partition deed was not executed by all of the owners of the mineral estate. This case concerns an approximately 74.15-acre tract located in DeWitt County, Texas. Prior to August 23, 2002, the property was owned as follows:
Kenneth, 1/2 surface and 1/4 minerals;
George, 1/2 surface and 1/4 minerals;
Charles, no surface and 1/4 minerals;
Doris, no surface and 1/4 minerals.
In August 2002, Kenneth and George executed two separate but essentially identical partition deeds that granted “all of that certain real estate lying and being situated” in George’s 37.07-acre interest of land (Tract A) to Kenneth, and “all of that certain real estate lying and being situated” in Kenneth’s 37.07–acre interest of land (Tract B) to George. Charles and Doris did not execute either partition deed.
A partition deed does not operate as a conveyance or transfer of title. Partition deeds are binding contracts. The “effect of a partition deed is to divide the Parent Property and to give to each the share which he already owned by virtue of some prior deed or other conveyance.” “As a general rule, cotenants may voluntarily partition land by written agreement, but all cotenants must participate in the voluntary partition.” “An agreement to partition land must bind all the owners or none is bound.” The court noted that the partition deeds were not executed by Charles or Doris, who were cotenants in the mineral estate. As a result, the court ruled that Kenneth and George did successfully partition the surface estate, but “because not all of the cotenants were a party to the partition of the mineral estate, none of the cotenants are bound by this purported partition of the mineral estate.”
The significance of this case is the holding that a partition deed is not enforceable unless all of the parties owning an interest in the estate partitioned join in the deed.