## Facts

- Leckie Smokeless Coal Co. owned the coal (at least the Sewell vein) under a 264-acre tract in Greenbrier County, West Virginia; H.N. Shawver appeared to own the surface.
- In 1940, Leckie and the Shawvers executed a written agreement under which, for $500, the Shawvers released damage claims arising from past and future mining, and were given a right to mine coal after Leckie completed its operations.
- Shawver later purported to assign his rights under the 1940 agreement to G.R. Kelly and W.L. Kelly, who conducted some limited mining but did not maintain a regular operation.
- Leckie later contracted with Rainelle Coal Co. to strip-mine the tract for a royalty.
- Rainelle and the Kellys negotiated over the Kellys’ claimed interest but did not reach agreement; Leckie then notified the Kellys it was cancelling any mining privilege and did not recognize the privilege as assignable.
- Rainelle strip-mined and removed coal worth several thousand dollars; the Kellys claimed Rainelle took coal that belonged to them under the assigned 1940 agreement.

## Issues

1. Whether the 1940 Leckie–Shawver agreement granted an assignable property interest in coal (e.g., a profit or a license coupled with an interest) or only a personal, nonassignable license to mine.
2. If the right was assignable, whether Leckie could unilaterally cancel it before Rainelle’s strip-mining.
3. Whether Rainelle’s removal of coal under its contract with Leckie constituted a wrongful taking of coal belonging to the Kellys, supporting the jury’s damages award.

## Decision

- The trial court entered judgment on a jury verdict for the Kellys for $15,541 plus interest.
- The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reversed.
- The court held the 1940 agreement created only a personal, nonassignable license to mine, not an assignable property interest in coal in place.
- Because the Kellys took only by purported assignment, they had no enforceable right against Rainelle for coal removed under Leckie’s later strip-mining contract.
- The case was remanded for disposition consistent with the reversal.

## Legal Principles

- A bare license to enter and extract minerals is generally personal, revocable, and nonassignable unless the instrument clearly provides otherwise or conveys a cognizable property interest.
- An easement or profit involves a transferable interest; a license does not, absent clear intent and language creating such an interest.
- When an instrument primarily functions as a settlement or release (here, release of surface-damage claims) and does not clearly convey title to minerals or a defined mineral estate, courts may construe any extraction right as a license rather than a conveyance.

## Conclusion

The court set aside the plaintiffs’ verdict because the surface owner’s post-mining right to extract coal was construed as a personal, nonassignable license; the Kellys, as assignees, therefore lacked a legally enforceable interest in the coal strip-mined by Rainelle under its agreement with the coal owner.


Kelly v. Rainelle Coal Co., 64 S.E.2d 606 (W. Va. 1951)