Montana Mining Co. v. St. Louis Mining & Milling Co.

Background

Two mining companies fought over a strip of ground called the compromise ground. The owner of the St. Louis claim agreed by bond and later deed to convey that strip to the other company after a patent. The instruments described the land and used language about "all the mineral therein contained" and also mentioned "dips, spurs and angles." Separate lawsuits followed about specific performance and about ore taken from beneath the compromise ground.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the bond and deed merely fixed a surface boundary or instead transferred the mineral rights beneath that surface, including rights that follow a vein as it dips underground. The Court focused on the words used in the bond and deed, the common-law rule that a conveyance ordinarily includes what is under the surface, and the customary mining-language added to the deed. The Court concluded the instruments conveyed more than a surface line and included subsurface mineral rights. Because of that interpretation the Court reversed the appeals court, ordered a new trial, and said the earlier order stopping mining should be put back in place.

Real world impact

The decision affects the two mining companies and any current mining activity on the disputed strip: the injunction stopping removal of ore is reinstated until final resolution. The case will go back for a new trial on the title and mining-rights issues, so the ruling is not the final end of the dispute and future proceedings could change the outcome.