Part of a dispute some 66 million years in the making, Murray v. BEJ Minerals, LLC considered for the first time whether dinosaur fossils—specifically a one-of-a-kind specimen containing entombed “dueling dinosaurs”—qualified as “minerals” for the purposes of a property transaction under Montana law. Finding no consistent statutory or dictionary definition for “mineral,” the Ninth Circuit relied on a test previously utilized by the Montana Supreme Court to hold that the dinosaur fossils constituted minerals due to their rare and exceptional qualities and were therefore part of the property’s mineral estate. The decision was promptly nullified, however, as the Ninth Circuit granted a rehearing en banc and the Montana legislature passed a mea...
The separation of estates can and does result in situations in which the interests of the possessors...
In Montana v. Crow Tribe of Indians, the United States Supreme Court declined to award the Crow Trib...
Oil and Gas—Mineral Deeds—Royalty Assignments—Parol Evidence (Stokes v. Tutvet, Mont. 1958
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted rehearing en banc in Murray v. BEJ Minerals, LLC, to dete...
The Montana Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in this matter on Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 9...
In 2019, Montana produced nearly twenty-three million barrels of crude oil, up slightly from its 201...
This piece focuses on the discovery of a T-Rex skeleton, and the contract formed between the private...
Defendant landowners claimed possession of riparian lands bordering the Missouri River. However, the...
The United States has been a major source of scientifically significant paleontological discoveries ...
In 1892 plaintiff\u27s predecessor in title contracted to convey certain land to defendant, subject ...
The Osage Nation, as owner of the beneficial interest in its mineral estate, issues federally-approv...
Grazing Permit Holder Liable for Trespass of Animals on Un-Patented Mining Claim (Ward v. Chevallier...
The twenty-first century oil and gas boom in the Lone Star State stimulated the industry and enriche...
What happens when a miner strikes gold (metaphorically and sometimes literally speaking) under someo...
The land in question was set aside by the state for school purposes. For some time prior to 1881 one...
The separation of estates can and does result in situations in which the interests of the possessors...
In Montana v. Crow Tribe of Indians, the United States Supreme Court declined to award the Crow Trib...
Oil and Gas—Mineral Deeds—Royalty Assignments—Parol Evidence (Stokes v. Tutvet, Mont. 1958
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted rehearing en banc in Murray v. BEJ Minerals, LLC, to dete...
The Montana Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in this matter on Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 9...
In 2019, Montana produced nearly twenty-three million barrels of crude oil, up slightly from its 201...
This piece focuses on the discovery of a T-Rex skeleton, and the contract formed between the private...
Defendant landowners claimed possession of riparian lands bordering the Missouri River. However, the...
The United States has been a major source of scientifically significant paleontological discoveries ...
In 1892 plaintiff\u27s predecessor in title contracted to convey certain land to defendant, subject ...
The Osage Nation, as owner of the beneficial interest in its mineral estate, issues federally-approv...
Grazing Permit Holder Liable for Trespass of Animals on Un-Patented Mining Claim (Ward v. Chevallier...
The twenty-first century oil and gas boom in the Lone Star State stimulated the industry and enriche...
What happens when a miner strikes gold (metaphorically and sometimes literally speaking) under someo...
The land in question was set aside by the state for school purposes. For some time prior to 1881 one...
The separation of estates can and does result in situations in which the interests of the possessors...
In Montana v. Crow Tribe of Indians, the United States Supreme Court declined to award the Crow Trib...
Oil and Gas—Mineral Deeds—Royalty Assignments—Parol Evidence (Stokes v. Tutvet, Mont. 1958