U.S. Court of Appeals reverses case between McKenzie County, Department of Interior to side with Interior
Patrice Bumstead
Farmer Editor
Editor’s Note: This is a continuation of the article featured in the March 26 edition, covering the history of this case up to the 1991 District Court decision in favor of McKenzie County.
On Thursday, March 20, the The U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, reversed a U.S. District Court decision that ruled in favor of McKenzie County in Case No. 24-177, against the Department of the Interior.
According to documents filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals Eighth Circuit Court, in 2003, McKenzie County became concerned with the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) compliance with the 1991 District Court order; “It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that title to the disputed minerals (6¼ percent royalty) is quieted in McKenzie County; and, the Defendants are barred from any claim in regard to the same or proceeds from the same; that McKenzie County is the owner of the disputed minerals (6¼ percent royalty) free and clear of any claim of the above named defendants.”
In November 2003, BLM submitted a statement to the county that stated “Only the acquired minerals in the [1930’s Condemnation Judgements] were subject to a 6¼ percent royalty reservation.” And in January 2004, BLM issued a letter with a list of specific tracts; a statement that BLM recognized a royalty interest in only about three-quarters of the lands the County identified; That the discrepancy was “because [the County’s] records included lands with Public Domain minerals; and that only lands acquired by the U.S. in the condemnations are subject to a 6¼ percent royalty reservation.
2016 Complaint
A lawsuit was filed against the United States on Jan. 11, 2016, on behalf of McKenzie County, under the Quiet Title Act, 28 U.S.C. §2409a.
The county requested a quiet title to the royalty interest in public domain minerals, listing specific tracts of land in the complaint. The U.S. argued that the claim was “untimely under the Quiet Title Act’s 12-year statute of limitations and moved for a dismissal.
The Court denied the motion for dismissal and ordered in favor of the County, stating that the 1991 Judgment already quieted titled to the public domain minerals for the County, and thus the Quiet Title Act’s limitation period was not relevant.
2019 Complaint
McKenzie County filed its second amended complaint in 2019, involving the All Writs Act and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 70(c), seeking to enforce the 1991 Judgement, or the 1930’s Condemnation Judgement.
The U.S. argued that the County failed to plausibly allege a right to relief under the All Writs Act and reasserted its stance on statute of limitations and motioned the court to dismiss. The District Court ruled in favor of McKenzie County, stating that it had pleaded facts sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.
Both parties moved for a summary judgment. The District Court held that the All Writs Act and Rule 70 empowered it to enforce its orders from both the 1991 Judgement and the 1930’s Condemnation Judgment clearly and unambiguously included the royalty interest in all lands listed, whether public domain or acquired, and that the 1991 Judgment plainly and unambiguously quieted title to the royalty interests in tracts listed in the 2019 Complaint.
The Court further ruled that the County’s Quiet Title Act claim was not barred by the Act’s statute of limitations and further, were it to address the issue in the first instance, it would quiet title to the public domain mineral royalty in the County.
The District Court denied the United States’ motion for summary judgement, and entered its judgement in favor of the County. It issued a writ of mandamus, along with a declaration that the royalty interest applies to both public domain and acquired minerals, followed by directing the U.S. to comply with the declaration as embodied in the 1930’s Condemnation Judgement and the 1991 Judgement.
~FindLaw.com
The Farmer will continue this topic in next week’s edition, providing insight on the current court case between McKenzie County and the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Visit www.watfordcitynd.com and subscribe to the McKenzie County Farmer today!