Opinion ID: 1233522
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: On Appeal of Raymond Picard

Text: Counsel for Raymond Picard contend that the trial court erred in awarding to Mrs. Richards an undivided one-fifth royalty interest or non-participating mineral interest, and that she is entitled only to one-fifth of one-eighth royalty interest or a one-fortieth non-participating royalty in all minerals when produced, during her lifetime only. Of course the trial court could hardly be blamed for decreeing to her the interest which was stipulated in the divorce decree as heretofore mentioned. Counsel for Picard were his counsel at the time of the divorce and doubtless participated in the subsequent agreement. However, it was said in Hickey v. Dirks, 156 Kan. 326, 133 P.2d 107, 109: As we have had frequent occasion to observe, terms relating to conveyances of oil and gas interests have often been loosely and inaccurately used. So, notwithstanding what counsel did at the time of the divorce decree, we must hold that their present contention that Mrs. Richards is entitled under the present lease to only one-fifth of one-eighth or a one-fortieth of the total production is correct. Counsel for Mrs. Richards during the oral argument in this court conceded that to be correct. If she were entitled to one-fifth or twenty percent of all the minerals produced, she would get all of the one-eighth royalty specified in the lease to the California Company. In addition to that, she would be entitled to 7½ percent from someone  not the California Company. That is too irrational and the court cannot accept such interpretation even without testimony in that connection. Cook v. McClellan, Okl., 311 P.2d 244, 245, presents a similar situation. The reservation in that case was as follows: `Except the first party reserves to himself, his heirs or assigns an equal one sixteenth Royalty interest in all Oil, Gas or Mineral rights.' The court held that the party was entitled to one-sixteenth of the usual one-eighth royalty. The judgment of the trial court must accordingly be modified.