Leon Oscar Ramirez, Jr., et al. v. ConocoPhillips Company, et al.

In Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 560 U.S. 702 (2010), the Court was unable to resolve whether the Takings Clause proscribes state courts from the elimination of established property ownership by changing or disregarding their common law. A fourJustice plurality answered in the affirmative. A twoJustice concurrence opined that the better course was to apply a due process analysis. Because the state court did not change or disregard its common law, another two-Justice concurrence concluded the question should be left for another day. Some lower courts adhere to the plurality, but others do not. The Court should resolve this important question of the meaning of the Takings Clause. The Questions Presented are:

1. Whether the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit common law courts from eliminating property ownership by changing or disregarding their common law.

2. Whether the Texas Supreme Court violated the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments by disregarding its 160-year-old law that a conveyance of land passes both the surface and minerals unless one is reserved or excepted by clear and express language.