Opinion ID: 2467420
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The royalties

Text: The Lynches argue that they should have been given a share of the mineral royalties paid to Ms. Brunner and her predecessors for mineral interests in tract 2 and tract 3. They claim that their entitlement to half of tract 3 and all of tract 2 dates back at least to 1958, or seven years after their evidence showed they went on the land. Ms. Brunner's response is that there has been no showing as to when any such royalties were received and the court made no determination as to when the Lynchs' possession ripened into title, thus the record does not support a division of the royalties. We need not decide this issue, as presumably the entitlement to royalties may be affected by the court's decision on the ownership of tract 3.