The Ohio Court of Appeals recently denied a motion from Long Point Energy, LLC, seeking to certify a conflict regarding mineral rights ownership. This decision affects parties involved in oil and gas interests and highlights ongoing legal disputes over the interpretation of Ohio's Dormant Mineral Act (DMA).

Long Point Energy filed its motion on September 8, 2026, following a prior ruling that found it lacked standing to challenge the abandonment of severed mineral rights. The court's decision is significant as it clarifies who has the authority to contest such abandonments and the requirements for valid affidavits under Ohio law.

Background

Long Point Energy, LLC, is the plaintiff in this case, while Gulfport Energy Corporation and several individuals, including Michael A. Perkins and others, are the defendants. The dispute centers around the ownership of severed oil and gas interests on approximately 198 acres owned by the Perkins family.

The case reached the Ohio Court of Appeals after the Belmont County Court of Common Pleas granted the Perkins' partial motion for judgment on the pleadings. This ruling effectively stated that Long Point did not have the standing to assert its claims regarding the mineral rights in question. Long Point's appeal followed, arguing that the trial court erred in its judgment.

The Ruling

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's decision on August 26, 2026. The court ruled that Long Point lacked standing to challenge the abandonment of the mineral interest, which was previously declared abandoned under the DMA. The court's opinion stated, "the holder, rather than a third party who attempts to purchase the holder’s interest, must be the one to challenge the validity of the abandonment."

Judges Katelyn Dickey, Carol Ann Robb, and Mark A. Hanni presided over the case. The court found that Long Point's claims were not valid based on established precedents, including several prior decisions known as the Cardinal Cases. The court emphasized that standing under the DMA is tied to the status of being a holder of the mineral interest.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for future disputes involving mineral rights in Ohio. It clarifies that only the original holder of a mineral interest can challenge its abandonment under the DMA. This decision could limit the ability of subsequent purchasers to contest such abandonments, potentially affecting how mineral rights are traded and contested in the state.

Additionally, the court's ruling regarding the validity of affidavits under Ohio law may impact how parties prepare and submit documents in similar cases. The court noted that the issues raised by Long Point were not dispositive, meaning they did not have a direct impact on the outcome of the case.

What's Next

Long Point Energy can potentially appeal this decision to the Supreme Court of Ohio, especially since the issues raised involve interpretations of law that have broader implications. There is also a related case pending in the Fifth District regarding similar questions of law, which could further influence how these matters are resolved in the future.