Texas Senate Bill SCR43

Texas 2009 - 81st Regular

• Introduced: 3/11/09
• Refer: 3/31/09

Caption

Granting Jimmy Glen Riemer, Richard Coon, Jr., June Meetze Coon Trust, Johnson Borger Ranch Partnership, and W. R. Edwards, Jr., permission to sue the State of Texas and the General Land Office.

Impact

Should SCR43 pass, it could lead to significant legal proceedings concerning the ownership of land and mineral rights adjacent to the Canadian River. The bill does not authorize monetary damages but allows for a legal framework to resolve the disputes over property lines, which could affect how landownership and mining operations are handled in the area. The resolution also emphasizes that any ruling will be final and binding for all future disputes, subject to legal provisions for changes due to erosion or accretion. This aspect of the bill underscores the importance of establishing a clear legal precedent regarding boundary issues linked to changes in natural landscapes.

Summary

SCR43 is a Concurrent Resolution that grants specific property owners along the Canadian River permission to sue the State of Texas and the General Land Office regarding a boundary dispute. The resolution is primarily a response to alleged inaccuracies in the surveying methods employed by state agencies, which have reportedly led to confusion regarding property lines in Hutchinson County. The resolution cites a previous legal case, Brainard v. Texas, where the Texas Supreme Court criticized the surveying techniques used to determine land boundaries. This earlier ruling has prompted current property owners to seek a judicial declaration of their land boundaries in accordance with the gradient boundary methodology approved by the U.S. Supreme Court in Oklahoma v. Texas.

Contention

The resolution confronts a broader issue regarding state and local land management practices. Advocates for the resolution might argue that it provides necessary clarity for landowners who feel threatened by state mismanagement of land boundaries. However, there may be concerns from other stakeholders, including environmental groups and individuals worried about state overreach in land management. The allowance of a lawsuit against the state could set a precedent for other property owners facing similar disputes and may create a pathway for more litigation in land disputes, highlighting the tension between private property rights and public land management responsibilities.