## Facts

- R. N. Wood owned a mineral interest in a one-acre tract subject to a limitation that no more than one oil well could be drilled on the land.
- An attorneys’ firm held an overriding royalty interest of 14/128 in the minerals.
- Wood conveyed to Lola Hearrell an undivided 49/128 mineral interest, creating a cotenancy.
- A producing oil well was drilled on the tract.
- Wood and Hearrell made an oral arrangement allowing Hearrell to operate the well during the period of their joint ownership; the arrangement was not intended to extend beyond that period.
- Wood later conveyed his remaining mineral interest to J. A. R. Moseley, Jr., who had actual knowledge of the prior oral operating arrangement.
- Moseley sued Hearrell and others to partition the mineral interest.
- Hearrell opposed partition, alleging it would be inequitable because she could not afford to buy at a receiver’s sale, a sale would not realize full value, and she would incur substantial federal income tax liability.

## Issues

1. Whether, under Texas partition statutes, a cotenant of a mineral interest is entitled to partition as a matter of right, or only upon a showing of additional equitable grounds.
2. Whether asserted personal hardship and claimed inequity to one cotenant can defeat another cotenant’s statutory right to partition.
3. Whether a trial court may order partition by sale when the mineral interest is incapable of partition in kind.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Texas reversed the court of civil appeals and affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
- The Court held that a joint owner of a mineral interest has a statutory right to partition.
- Because the mineral interest was not susceptible to partition in kind, the trial court properly ordered partition by sale through a receiver and division of proceeds.
- Hearrell’s allegations of economic hardship and adverse tax consequences did not bar partition.
- The oral operating arrangement between Wood and Hearrell did not restrict Moseley’s statutory partition right where it was limited to the period of Wood and Hearrell’s joint ownership.

## Legal Principles

- Texas partition statutes grant a cotenant a legal right to partition jointly owned property, including mineral interests.
- If partition in kind is impracticable, the court may order partition by judicial sale and divide the proceeds among the owners.
- Personal financial hardship, expected undervaluation at a court-ordered sale, or tax consequences to a cotenant are not defenses that defeat another cotenant’s statutory right to partition.
- Equitable considerations may affect the manner of implementing partition, but not the existence of the statutory entitlement to partition.

## Conclusion

The Texas Supreme Court enforced a mineral cotenant’s statutory right to partition and approved partition by sale where in-kind division was impracticable, holding that a cotenant’s claimed economic hardship and tax consequences do not defeat the right to partition.


Moseley v. Hearrell, 171 S.W.2d 337 (Tex. 1943)