Love v. National Bank

5 Citing cases

  1. Riddleberger v. Chesapeake Railway

    229 Va. 213 (Va. 1985)   Cited 4 times

    3. Love v. National Bank, 205 Va. 860, 140 S.E.2d 650 (1965), where Code Sec. 55-154 was held constitutional is not controlling here because that case involved property east of the Blue Ridge and application of the statute west of the Blue Ridge was not considered there. 4.

  2. Van Slooten v. Larsen

    86 Mich. App. 437 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978)   Cited 8 times
    In Van Slooten v Larsen, 86 Mich. App. 437; 272 N.W.2d 675 (1978), another panel of the Court of Appeals upheld the constitutionality of the act.

    Va Code, § 55-154 to § 55-155. Held constitutional in Love v Lynchburg National Bank Trust Co, 205 Va. 860; 140 S.E.2d 650 (1965). "While the rule appears to be sound enough from the mineral owner's point of view, it can cause economic inconvenience to the public.

  3. Short v. Texaco, Inc.

    273 Ind. 518 (Ind. 1980)   Cited 44 times
    Upholding the constitutionality of the Mineral Lapse Act that terminated interests in coal, oil, gas, and other minerals not used for 20 years, noting "[t]he objectives are valid and similar to those served by acts of limitation and the law of adverse possession"

    This Act is also based upon the same rule. Cf. Love v. Lynchburg National Bank and Trust Co., (1965) 205 Va. 860, 140 S.E.2d 650. We do not disregard the distinctions between the two types of statutes.

  4. Wheelock v. Heath

    201 Neb. 835 (Neb. 1978)   Cited 20 times
    In Wheelock v. Heath (1978), 201 Neb. 835, 272 N.W.2d 768, the statute declared that severed mineral interests would be deemed abandoned unless the record owner publicly exercised defined ownership rights within a period of 23 years or asserted his interest in an action filed within 2 years after the effective date of the statute.

    " Appellees refer to a Virginia case, Love v. Lynchburg National Bank Trust Co., 205 Va. 860, 140 S.E.2d 650 (1965), as supporting their position. It is true, in that case a statute extinguishing mineral interests was held to be constitutional. That case, however, is distinguishable. There, the statute merely created a presumption there were no minerals in the land if the claim was not exercised for 35 years.

  5. Harvey v. Sines

    228 Md. App. 283 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2016)   Cited 3 times
    In Harvey, as in the present case, surface owners filed a petition in the circuit court to terminate the mineral interests on their property, which had been dormant for at least 40 years.

    We note that similar statutes in other states have been found to be constitutional under both federal and state constitutions. See, e.g., Texaco, Inc. v. Short, 454 U.S. 516, 526, 102 S.Ct. 781, 70 L.Ed.2d 738 (1982) (“[T]his Court has recognized that States have the power to permit unused or abandoned interests in property to revert to another after the passage of time”); Short v. Texaco, Inc., 273 Ind. 518, 406 N.E.2d 625 (1980), aff'd, 454 U.S. 516, 102 S.Ct. 781, 70 L.Ed.2d 738 (1982) (upheld under state constitution and federal constitution); Van Slooten v. Larsen, 410 Mich. 21, 299 N.W.2d 704 (1980) (same); Contos v. Herbst, 278 N.W.2d 732 (Minn.1979) (same); Love v. Lynchburg Nat. Bank & Trust Co., 205 Va. 860, 140 S.E.2d 650 (1965) (upheld under state constitution). Moreover, the states that have found dormant mineral interests acts to be unconstitutional were considering statutory language that differed from the language of the Maryland act.