Mineral Rights: Sand and Gravel Trespass

摘要

Saddle Mountain owns extensive minerals and mineral rights in the Kennewick area. Santiago owns a portion of the surface estate lying above a portion of Saddle Mountain's severed mineral estate. The deed severing the surface estate specifically included the mineral owner's right to extract the sand and gravel. In 1996, Santiago engages in various mineral extraction operations on its property relating to the construction of a mobile home park. This led to an earlier round of litigation ending in which reinstated Saddle Mountain's trespass caues of action. The trial court grants a partial summary judgment to Santiago finding that they did not have either a statutory or common law trespass claim. While this case is on appeal the Washington Supreme Court decided Saddle Mountain Minerals, LLC v. Joshi, 152 Wash.2d 242, 95 P.3d 1236, 162 0.&G.R. 980 (Wash. 2004) an analogous case which reinstated similar trespass claims against another surface owner. Held: reversed in part and remanded. The court finds Joshi to be controlling because it interpreted a similarly broad reservation of mineral rights by Saddle Mountain. Even though in Joshi the applicable zoning ordinance prohibited mining operations on the tract, the Supreme Court concluded that the mineral owner had been damaged by the alleged wrongful extraction of minerals by the surface owner. The court agrees that there must be a balance between the rights of a severed mineral owner and the rights of a severed surface owner but that a surface owner cannot confiscate or sell minerals from the tract without committing a trespass. Thus, the case is remanded to the trial court to follow the guidelines set forth in Joshi.