Opinion ID: 6326322
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Application of Law to the Leases in this Case

Text: {¶ 19} The oil and gas leases at issue in this case are no different from the typical lease discussed above. The leases grant rights to Ascent to explore the land for oil and gas and to produce it, and they permit Ascent to physically occupy the land, which includes the rights to construct wells and other facilities, to erect telephone lines, pipelines, and powerlines, and to build roads. The leases also include a primary term and a secondary term, and they state that the leases terminate unless a well is producing oil or gas or unless Ascent has commenced drilling operations within 90 days of the expiration of the primary term. Therefore, the oil and gas leases may terminate by operation of law if certain conditions stated in their terms are not met. {¶ 20} The action in this case is therefore a controversy involving the title to or the possession of real property. If the action is successful, it will quiet title to the property, remove the leases as encumbrances to the property, and restore the possession of the land to the lessors. If the action is unsuccessful, however, title to the land will remain subject to the leases, affecting the transferability of the property. See Buell at ¶ 64. Also, Ascent would have the continued right to possess and occupy the land, as permitted by the leases, denying French the right to use the property without restriction. See id. Either way, the action closely involves the title to or the possession of real property and, under R.C. 2711.01(B)(1), the action is not subject to arbitration.