Stuart v. Commonwealth
Stuart, Trustee v. Commonwealth
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
OHIEE JUSTICE BENNETT
delivered the opinion op the court.
By this proceeding the estate proposed to be taxed is the mineral estate of the appellant, which he holds by separate title, another holding the surface title. It is settled by this court that an estate in fee carries with it all metals and' minerals thereunder, but the surface and the mineral interests may be conveyed to different persons and become separate ¡property, and each «interest conveyed, if the minerals are conveyed in place, will be land. In other words, the minerals’ and the surface interests may, by separate conveyance, become separate pieces of real estate, and held by different persons, and each estate may be separately seized and sold by execution, and each may be defeated by the statute of limitations as any other real estate. (See Kincaid, &c., v. McGrowan, &c., 88 Ky., 91 , where the matter is fully discussed.) The mineral estate, when severed <by conveyance, being-separate real estate, may be taxed as other real estate.
The judgment is affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 8 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.