Source: https://chestofbooks.com/real-estate/Real-Property-Interests-Law/Extent-of-possession-Part-3.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 02:16:45+00:00

Document:
53. Griffin v. Lee, 90 Ga. 224, 15 S. E. 810; Den d. Carson v. Mills, 18 N. C. 546, 30 Am. Dec. 143.
54. Louisville etc. R. Co. v. Gulf of Mexico Land etc. Co., 82 Miss. 188, 33 So. 845, 100 Am. St. Rep. 627; Jackson v. Woodruff, 1 Cow. (N. Y.) 276; Simpson v. Downing, 23 Wend. (N. Y.) 316; Thompson v. Burhans, 61 N. Y. 52; Paine v. Hutchins, 49 Vt. 314; Pepper v. O'dowd, 39 Wis. 538 (statute). See Zirngibl v. Calumet & C. Canal & Dock Co., 157 111. 430, 42 N. E; 431; Turner v. Stephenson, 72 Mich. 409, 2 L. R. A. 277, 40 N. W. 735; Murphy v. Doyle, 37 Minn. 113, 33 N. W. 220; Chandler v. Spear, 22 Vt. 388.
55. Marietta Fertilizer Co. v. Blair, 173 Ala. 524, 56 So. 131; Hicks v. Coleman, 25 Cal. 122, 85 Am. Dec. 103; Furgerson v. Bagley, 95 Ga. 516, 20 S. E. 241; Taliaferro v. Butler, 77 Tex. 578, 14 S. W. 191. See 6 Columbia Law Rev. 583, for a criticism of the New York rule. See also Doe d. Lenoir v. South, 32 N. Car. 237.
- Minerals in the land. The question lias quite frequently arisen, under what circumstances does the statute of limitations run as regards rights in minerals beneath the surface of land. There exists in this connection a primary distinction between the case in which the ownership of the surface of the land is not already separated from that of the minerals, and that in which it is so separated.
56. Trotter v. Cassaday, 3 A. K. Marsh, 365, 13 Am. Dec. 183; Cochran v. Linville Imp. Co., 127 N. Car. 386, 37 S. E. 496; Jones v. Chiles, 2 Dana (Ky.) 25; Willamette Real Estate Co. v. Hen-drix, 28 Ore. 485, 42 Pac. 514, 52 Am. St. Rep. 800; Chandler Rushing, 38 Tex. 591; Sharpe v. Shenandoah Furnace Co., 100 Va. 27, 40 S. E. 103.
57. Zundel v. Baldwin, 114 Ala. 328, 21 So. 420; Wheeler v. Foote, 80 Ark. 435, 97 S. W. 447 (distinguished in Johnson & Burr v. Elder, 92 Ark. 30, 1-1 S. W.
1066); Knorr v. Raymond, 73 Ga. 749; Williams v. Ballance, 23 111 193, 74 Am. Dec. 187; Murphy v. Comm. 187 Mass, 361, 73 N.e 524 (gemote); Heinemann v. Bennett, 144 Mo. 113. 45 S. W. L092; Ruf fin v. Overby, 105 N. C 78, 11 S. E. 251; Cochran v. Linville Imp. Co.. 127 X. C 386, 37 N. E. 196; Bowles v. Brice, 66 Tex. 724 S. W. 729. Contra, Maasengill v. Bayles, 11 Humph. (Tenn.) 113; Texas Land Co. v. Williams. 51 Tex 61; Walker v. Knox, Tex Civ. Apr , 191 S. w. 730.
58. See Armstrong v. Caldwell, 53 N. Y. 284; editorial note 10 Columbia Law Rev. 70.
59. Baker v. Clark, 128 Cal. 181, 60 Pac. 677; Davis v. Shepherd, 31 Colo. 141, 72 Pac. 57; Bradley v. Johnson. 11 Idaho. 689, 83 Pac. 927.
60. Black Warrior Coal Co. v. West, 170 Ala. 346, 54 So. 200; Mcburney v. Glenmary Coal & Coke Co., 121 Tenn. 275, 118 S. W. 220. The latter case was, however, overruled by Northcut v. Church, 135 Tenn. 541, 188 S. W. 220.
60a. Moore v. Empire Land Co., Ala., 61 So. 940. See editorial notes 24 Harv. Law Rev. 582, 27 Id. 173.
61. Louisville v. Nashville R. Co., 136 Ala. 156. 96 Am. St. Rep. 17, 33 So. 896. See editorial note 10 Columbia Law Rev. 70, and cases cited, post, note 64.
Of the company, and that, hy such operations, the company had in effect made a severance of the minerals from the surface, analogous to the severance or separation of ownership referred to in the next paragraph.62 This theory of severance by the working of the mineral deposits is somewhat obscure, and the same result might, it is submitted, have been attained on the theory, above referred to, that actual possession is not extended by construction as against the rightful owner in possession of part of his land.
62. Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. v. Hughes, 183 Pa. 66, 38 L. R. A. 826, 38 Atl. 568, 63 Am. St. Rep. 743.
63. If the separation of ownership does not occur until after the taking of wrongful possession of the surface, it does not, it has been decided, prevent the running of the statute as to the minerals as well as the surface. Finnegan v. Stineman, 5 Pa. Super. Ct. 124.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.