Court says dinosaur fossils worth millions aren't minerals

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Court says dinosaur fossils worth millions aren’t minerals
By AMY BETH HANSON yesterday

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — Dinosaur fossils aren’t minerals under state law, a divided Montana Supreme Court said in a ruling Wednesday that has implications in an ongoing legal battle over the ownership of millions of dollars of fossils unearthed on an eastern Montana ranch.

Lige and Mary Ann Murray own the surface rights and one-third of the mineral rights of the ranch near Jordan, while brothers Jerry and Bo Severson each own a third of the mineral rights on the ranch once owned by their father.

The dinosaurs unearthed on the ranch include a T. rex found in 2013, a triceratops skull discovered in 2011 and the 2006 discovery of a pair of dinosaurs that appeared to have been locked in battle when they died. The T. rex was sold for millions of dollars. The so-called “dueling dinosaurs” drew a bid of $5.5 million in a 2014 auction, but failed to reach the $6 million reserve price.

In a legal effort to clarify the ownership of the dueling dinosaurs before trying to sell them, the Murrays sought a court order saying they owned the fossils. A federal judge in Montana ruled dinosaur fossils were part of the surface estate and thus they were owned by the Murrays. The Seversons appealed, and a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that ruling in a 2-1 decision in February 2018.

{snip}

[exboyfil]

1. Technically they are minerals

Just capturing the skeletal structure of the critters who died. The bones were a mold.

Interesting case. I can't believe they didn't reach the reserve price for the dueling dinosaurs. In a post-coronavirus world, they may have wanted to have taken the $5.5M. It will be a long time before museums drop big bucks on exhibits again.

[mn9driver]

2. Surface rights vs mineral rights

In most places, surface rights include sand, gravel and limestone on the property. Mineral rights exclude these things. It’s an interesting question, but I think the surface rights holders have the stronger case. Apparently the Montana Supreme Court agrees.