## Facts

- The State of North Dakota holds sovereign title to beds of navigable waters within the state, including the oil and gas underlying those beds.
- In 1957, the United States acquired land by eminent domain from Emery Papineau; the condemnation decree reserved to Papineau “all oil and gas rights.”
- After the acquisition, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers excavated a trench through the area; the navigable Missouri River began flowing through the trench, creating a new channel.
- The prior river channel became a long oxbow (abandoned former riverbed), including a portion located in the NE ¼ of Section 9, McKenzie County.
- The State, asserting ownership of the oxbow bed as former navigable riverbed, leased oil and gas rights there to Ladd Petroleum Corporation (1983).
- Sun Exploration and Production Company obtained an oil and gas lease from a private landowner adjacent to the oxbow (1982) and later drilled a producing well in the NE ¼ of Section 9 (1985).
- David A. Papineau, as successor to Emery Papineau’s reserved mineral rights, leased the oxbow riverbed in Section 9 to a lessee who assigned the lease to J.P. Furlong Enterprises, Inc. and Nantasket Petroleum Corporation.
- Plaintiffs sued to quiet title and for related relief, arguing a North Dakota statute governing changes in navigable river channels shifted the State’s title to the new channel and left the oxbow minerals with Papineau’s successors.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for defendants, reasoning the statute applied only to natural channel changes, not to man-made rechanneling.

## Issues

1. Whether North Dakota’s statute governing ownership consequences of a change in a navigable river’s course applies when the channel change is caused by human activity rather than natural processes.
2. If the statute applies, whether the State’s riverbed (and mineral) ownership follows the new navigable channel and the abandoned former bed becomes subject to private ownership, including reserved mineral interests.
3. Whether summary judgment for defendants was proper given the statute’s scope.

## Decision

- The North Dakota Supreme Court held the statute applies to man-made changes in the course of a navigable river.
- The court reversed the summary judgment for defendants and remanded for further proceedings to determine ownership and related relief under the statute as interpreted.

## Legal Principles

- State sovereign title to the bed of a navigable river (and underlying minerals) is governed by statute when the river’s navigable channel changes.
- The channel-change statute is not limited to natural processes; it applies when the navigable channel relocates, even if the relocation results from artificial or man-made actions.
- Under the statute’s operation, sovereign title follows the navigable channel, and the abandoned former bed may pass from the State to private ownership consistent with the statutory “swap” mechanism.
- Summary judgment is improper when premised on a legal interpretation that narrows an applicable statute contrary to its text and purpose.

## Conclusion

The court interpreted North Dakota’s navigable-water channel-change statute to apply to artificial river diversions, requiring that the State retain title to the new navigable channel while the abandoned former riverbed is treated under the statute’s ownership-shifting rule, and it reversed summary judgment that had excluded man-made changes from the statute’s reach.


J.P. Furlong Enters., Inc. v. Sun Expl. & Prod. Co., 423 N.W.2d 130 (N.D. 1988)