State law reference
Do Mineral Rights Expire in Texas?
Do mineral rights expire in Texas? No Texas statute was found that ends or transfers a severed mineral interest because it went unused.
No statute found Researched and checked by American Mineral Registry by searching the text it could read, which turned up no statute on this point; review completed October 1, 2026. Reference research, not legal advice.
- Rule type
- No such statute found
- Period
- None
- Ends without a surface owner step
- Not applicable
- Preservation filing
- Not applicable
- Forced pooling statute
- Statute found
Official text cited - Surface damages statute
- No statute found
- Deceased or unlocated owner
- Partly checked
How the rule works
No dormant mineral statute identified; court receivership for absent owners and unclaimed proceeds rules instead. No Texas statute was found that ends or transfers a severed mineral interest because it went unused. Two statutes deal with owners who cannot be found without moving title: a district court or the business court may appoint a receiver to lease, assign or ratify on behalf of a nonresident or absent owner of an undivided mineral, leasehold or royalty interest who has not paid or rendered taxes on it for five years, with the money held in the court registry for as long as the owner fails to appear (Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091, 64.093); and mineral proceeds unclaimed for more than three years, together with the owner's underlying right to receive them, are presumed abandoned and handled as unclaimed property (Prop. Code 75.101). Neither statute gives the mineral title to the surface owner.
Scope
- Interests covered
- Not applicable to lapse. The receivership statutes reach undivided mineral interests, leasehold interests (including overriding royalties, production payments and working interests) and royalty interests of nonresidents or owners whose residence or identity is unknown; Property Code chapter 75 reaches mineral proceeds and the owner's underlying right to receive them.
- Minerals covered
- Receivership: oil, gas or other minerals. Property Code chapter 75: oil, gas, uranium, sulphur, lignite, coal and any other substance ordinarily and naturally considered a mineral.
- Enactment and amendments
- Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091 from 1985 (amended 1989, 1991, 2009 and 2025); 64.093 added 1999; 2025 amendments added the business court (HB 40, effective September 1, 2025) and repealed subsection (k) of each section (HB 16, 2nd called session, effective December 4, 2025). Property Code chapter 75 from 1985; 75.101 amended 1987.
- What AMR searched
- Official text read through Internet Archive copies of statutes.capitol.texas.gov (the host was not available when AMR checked): Natural Resources Code chapter 91 (every subchapter heading; full text searched for dormant, abandoned mineral, unknown owner and missing), chapters 92 and 102; Civil Practice and Remedies Code chapter 64 (64.091 to 64.093); Property Code chapter 75. No dormant mineral, abandoned mineral or marketable title statute was found in these chapters; a full search of the Property Code was not possible. Search results show bills on reporting severed mineral interests and vesting abandoned mineral interests (HB 2756 and HB 3016 of 1995, HB 834 of 2009, HB 5103 of 2025); their text and fate could not be read because Texas Legislature Online was not available when AMR checked.
What “none found” means. AMR searched the official code for a dormant mineral, abandonment, lapse or forfeiture statute and found none. That does not mean a mineral interest can never be lost: deeds, title defects, tax sales, adverse possession and other rules can still affect ownership, and they are outside this review.
Dates and what they mean
There is no statutory nonuse period to calculate for this jurisdiction under the rules AMR reviewed.
No lapse, so there is no date to compute; There is no Texas lapse date. A receivership never ends the absent owner's title.
Deceased or unlocated owner
Partly checked What the law of Texas says when the owner of record has died, is unknown, or cannot be found. It sets out the questions; it does not decide who owns an interest, whether a notice was valid, or whether an interest ended.
Why only partly checked. The diligence required before publication under Tex. R. Civ. P. 109 and two appellate decisions on receiver leases were not read.
Texas has no dormant mineral act, so no nonuse clock runs against a deceased, unknown or unlocated mineral owner. Instead a co-owner may ask a district court to appoint a receiver to lease, assign or ratify for an undivided mineral, leasehold or royalty interest whose owner's residence or identity is unknown or who is a nonresident and has not paid or rendered taxes on it for five years; the money stays in the court registry until the owner or the owner's heirs, assigns or personal representatives appear. Separately, mineral proceeds unclaimed for over three years, with the right to receive them, are presumed abandoned.
- Owner of record has died
- Not named as such. The receivership statutes speak of the defendant or the defendant's heirs, assigns or personal representatives appearing to claim the interest (64.091(e), 64.093(e)); in Clay Exploration the receivership covered the unknown heirs of a record owner.
- Current owner unknown
- A defendant whose identity is unknown qualifies for a receivership on the same terms as one whose residence is unknown (64.091(b-1), 64.093(b)).
- Owner known but cannot be found
- A defendant whose residence is unknown, or a nonresident, qualifies if the other conditions are met; the plaintiff must prove a diligent but unsuccessful effort to locate the defendant (64.091(c)).
How the nonuse rule treats these owners Not addressed in the provisions read
No Texas nonuse or dormancy mechanism was identified in the October review, so there is no dormancy rule to apply to these owners; the receivership below is the mineral specific mechanism.
Heirs, devisees and successors Statute and court decisions
The receivership statutes name heirs, assigns and personal representatives only as persons who end the receivership's indefinite run by appearing in court. A Houston court of appeals held that an heirship claim made outside court did not end a receivership or void the receiver's lease.
Statute
The receivership continues as long as the defendant or the defendant's heirs, assigns or personal representatives fail to appear in court in person or by agent or attorney to claim the interest. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(e)
“A receivership created under this subchapter continues as long as the defendant or his heirs, assigns, or personal representatives fail to appear in court in person or by agent or attorney to claim the defendant's interest.”
Scope: Receiverships under Subchapter F. The section does not say how a receivership is dissolved once a claimant appears.
In a royalty receivership the receivership likewise continues while the defendant or the defendant's heirs, assigns or personal representatives fail to appear to claim the interest. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.093(e)
“A receivership created under this section continues as long as the defendant or the defendant's heirs, assigns, or personal representatives fail to appear in court in person or by agent or attorney to claim the defendant's interest.”
Scope: Royalty receiverships under 64.093.
Court decisions
A claim of heirship communicated outside the judicial process did not by itself end a 64.091 receivership or invalidate a lease the receiver later signed. Clay Exploration, Inc. v. Santa Rosa Operating, LLC, 442 S.W.3d 795 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 2014), slip op. at 7
“We conclude that Santa Rosa is incorrect, however, and hold that a claim of heirship communicated outside the judicial process did not alone invalidate either the receivership or the lease.”
Scope: Intermediate appellate court; binding on trial courts in its district and persuasive elsewhere; later petition history not checked. Receivership for unknown heirs of a record owner.
Search required to find the owner Statute
The plaintiff must plead in a verified petition and prove a diligent but unsuccessful effort to locate the defendant. The statute does not say what records must be searched.
Statute
The plaintiff must allege in a verified petition and prove a diligent but unsuccessful effort to locate the defendant, and substantial damage or injury without a receiver. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(c)
“The plaintiff in the action must allege by verified petition and prove that he: (1) has made a diligent but unsuccessful effort to locate the defendant; and (2) will suffer substantial damage or injury unless the receiver is appointed.”
Scope: Section 64.091 actions. The statute does not list the sources that a diligent search must cover.
Who gets notice, and how Statute and court decisions
The plaintiff names the last known or last record owner as defendant and serves notice by publication under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. In 1986 the Supreme Court of Texas treated a posted notice in such a case as akin to citation by publication.
Statute
In a co-owner action the plaintiff must name the last known owner or last record owner as defendant and serve notice by publication under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(d)(1) and (2)
“(1) the plaintiff, in the verified petition, must name the last known owner or the last record owner of the interest as defendant; (2) the plaintiff must serve notice on the defendant by publication as provided by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure;”
Scope: Actions under 64.091(b)(1). The Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on citation by publication were not read for this record.
Court decisions
The Supreme Court of Texas treated a three day posting of the petition in a mineral receivership as analogous to citation by publication. Gray v. PHI Resources, Ltd., 710 S.W.2d 566 (Tex. 1986) (per curiam)
“Nonetheless, the three-day posting of the petition is analogous to citation by publication, Tex.R.Civ.P. 109, or other substituted service, Tex.R.Civ.P. 109a.”
Scope: Supreme Court of Texas, controlling statewide. Decided under former art. 2320b, before the 2009 amendment that now requires publication; it does not settle what notice satisfies today's 64.091(d).
Notice by publication Statute
Publication is the stated method of service on the absent or unknown defendant in 64.091(d)(2) and 64.093(d)(2); the conditions for publication in the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure were not read.
Statute
In a co-owner action the plaintiff must name the last known owner or last record owner as defendant and serve notice by publication under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(d)(1) and (2)
“(1) the plaintiff, in the verified petition, must name the last known owner or the last record owner of the interest as defendant; (2) the plaintiff must serve notice on the defendant by publication as provided by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure;”
Scope: Actions under 64.091(b)(1). The Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on citation by publication were not read for this record.
How the owner responds or preserves Statute and court decisions
The owner or heirs, assigns or personal representatives respond by appearing in court to claim the interest; until then the receivership continues. Successors served by posting had two years to move for a new trial in Gray v. PHI Resources.
Statute
The receivership continues as long as the defendant or the defendant's heirs, assigns or personal representatives fail to appear in court in person or by agent or attorney to claim the interest. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(e)
“A receivership created under this subchapter continues as long as the defendant or his heirs, assigns, or personal representatives fail to appear in court in person or by agent or attorney to claim the defendant's interest.”
Scope: Receiverships under Subchapter F. The section does not say how a receivership is dissolved once a claimant appears.
Court decisions
Successors of a record owner whose interest was placed in a receivership on posted notice could move for a new trial within two years after the judgment was signed. Gray v. PHI Resources, Ltd., 710 S.W.2d 566 (Tex. 1986) (per curiam)
“Thus, the successors to R.L. Robbins’ interest were entitled to bring their motion for new trial within two years from the date the judgment was signed. Tex.R.Civ.P. 329.”
Scope: Supreme Court of Texas, controlling statewide. Concerns heirs and successors of a named owner; the case was remanded and the opinion does not decide the merits of their claim.
The court read 64.091(e) as continuing the receivership at least until the heirs appear in court, and found nothing making an appearance dissolve it retroactively. Clay Exploration, Inc. v. Santa Rosa Operating, LLC, 442 S.W.3d 795 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 2014), slip op. at 8 to 9
“nothing in the statute indicates that such an appearance would dissolve the receivership retroactively.”
Scope: Same court and limits as P13. The court did not decide whether a petition in intervention alleging that the heirs were found was an appearance.
Court, receivership or trust for missing owners Statute and court decisions
Court appointed receivers for undivided mineral and leasehold interests (64.091) and royalty interests (64.093) of nonresident, absent or unknown owners, with proceeds held in the court registry; a general missing person receivership (64.001(d)); and the three year presumption of abandonment for unclaimed mineral proceeds (Prop. Code 75.101).
Statute
A district court or the business court may appoint a receiver for a mineral interest or mineral leasehold interest owned by a nonresident or absent defendant, in an action brought by a co-owner of an undivided interest. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(b)
“In the following actions, a district court or the business court may appoint a receiver for the mineral interest or leasehold interest under a mineral lease owned by a nonresident or absent defendant:”
Scope: Undivided mineral interests and undivided leasehold interests under a mineral lease of Texas land, in an action by a co-owner; applies only where the statutory conditions are pleaded and proved. Does not transfer title.
The defendant must be a person whose residence or identity is unknown, or a nonresident, who has not paid or rendered taxes on the interest for the five years before the action was filed. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(b-1)
“(1) be a person whose residence or identity is unknown or a nonresident; and (2) have not paid taxes on the interest or rendered it for taxes during the five-year period immediately preceding the filing of the action.”
Scope: Covers owners whose identity is unknown and owners whose residence is unknown in the same words; the section does not separately mention death.
As ordered by the court, the receiver executes mineral leases or assignments on the outstanding undivided interests and may enter a unitization agreement authorized by the Railroad Commission. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(f)
“As ordered by the court, the receiver shall immediately: (1) execute and deliver to a lessee or successive lessees mineral leases on the outstanding undivided mineral interests;”
Scope: Undivided mineral interests and undivided leasehold interests under a mineral lease of Texas land, in an action by a co-owner; applies only where the statutory conditions are pleaded and proved. Does not transfer title.
Lease money is paid to the court clerk, applied to costs, and the balance and later payments are held in the court registry for the owner. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(h)
“Payments made at a later time under the lease, assignment, or unitization agreement shall be paid into the registry of the court and impounded for the use and benefit of the owner of the mineral or leasehold interest.”
Scope: Money from instruments executed by a 64.091 receiver.
A parallel receivership exists for an undivided royalty interest owned by a nonresident or absent defendant, under which the receiver ratifies leases or pooling agreements. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.093(a) and (f)
“A district court or the business court may appoint a receiver for the royalty interest owned by a nonresident or absent defendant in an action that:”
Scope: Undivided royalty interests. Section 64.093(b) to (e) repeat the unknown residence or identity, five year tax, diligent search, publication and heirs wording of 64.091.
Mineral proceeds unclaimed for longer than three years after they became payable, together with the owner's underlying right to receive them, are presumed abandoned. Tex. Prop. Code 75.101(a)
“All mineral proceeds that are held or owing by the holder and that have remained unclaimed by the owner for longer than three years after they became payable or distributable and the owner's underlying right to receive those mineral proceeds are presumed abandoned.”
Scope: Payments owed on Texas minerals; handled under the unclaimed property procedures of Prop. Code chapter 74, which were not read. Says nothing about title to the mineral interest itself.
Separately, a family law or probate court may appoint a receiver for the estate of a missing person when the estate is in danger of loss and needs a representative. Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.001(d)
“appoint a receiver for the missing person if: (1) it appears that the estate of the missing person is in danger of injury, loss, or waste; and (2) the estate of the missing person is in need of a representative.”
Scope: General, not mineral specific: missing person as defined in Code of Criminal Procedure art. 63.001; terms of six months under 64.102(e). Not reviewed further.
Court decisions
A claim of heirship communicated outside the judicial process did not by itself end a 64.091 receivership or invalidate a lease the receiver later signed. Clay Exploration, Inc. v. Santa Rosa Operating, LLC, 442 S.W.3d 795 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 2014), slip op. at 7
“We conclude that Santa Rosa is incorrect, however, and hold that a claim of heirship communicated outside the judicial process did not alone invalidate either the receivership or the lease.”
Scope: Intermediate appellate court; binding on trial courts in its district and persuasive elsewhere; later petition history not checked. Receivership for unknown heirs of a record owner.
What a title review must establish
- Is any undivided mineral, leasehold or royalty interest in the chain held by a 64.091 or 64.093 receiver, and what does the appointment order authorize the receiver to sign?
- Has the record owner, or an heir, assign or personal representative, appeared in the receivership case to claim the interest, and has the court acted on it?
- Was notice by publication made against the last known or last record owner, and was the diligent search pleaded and proved?
- Was a lease signed by the receiver within the authority of the appointment order?
- Have proceeds for the interest been reported to the Comptroller as presumed abandoned under Prop. Code 75.101?
Dates. Receivership eligibility: the defendant has not paid taxes on the interest or rendered it for taxes during the five-year period immediately preceding the filing of the action (64.091(b-1), 64.093(b)). Receivership duration: continues as long as the defendant or heirs, assigns or personal representatives fail to appear (64.091(e)). Unclaimed proceeds: unclaimed for longer than three years after they became payable or distributable (Prop. Code 75.101(a)). Motion for new trial after service by posting: within two years from the date the judgment was signed (Gray v. PHI Resources, applying Tex. R. Civ. P. 329). Missing person receivership: a term not exceeding six months, extendable (64.102(e)). Nothing computed. The rule finder does not calculate this period.
What AMR searched. Read in full: Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code chapter 64 (all subchapters, including 64.001(d) and Subchapters F and G) from the official statutes site through an Internet Archive snapshot of December 9, 2025, the latest snapshot holding statute text; Tex. Prop. Code 75.001 to 75.102 through a November 14, 2025 snapshot. Earlier October reads of Natural Resources Code chapters 91, 92 and 102 were searched for unknown, absent, nonresident and missing with no further owner status provision. Cases: CourtListener search for 64.091 (17 hits; Clay Exploration, Gray v. PHI Resources read in full; Amoco Production v. Wood and Barnes v. Coffman listed but not read). Not reviewed: Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 109 to 117a on citation by publication, Prop. Code chapter 74 claim procedures, Estates Code heirship and general trespass to try title. A point marked not addressed means only that the provisions read do not address it; probate, quiet title and other general procedures may still apply and were not reviewed.
Not settled by this review.
What diligence and affidavit Tex. R. Civ. P. 109 requires before publication in a 64.091 or 64.093 case, and whether a 64.091 receivership can be dissolved after heirs appear.
Whether the 2025 amendments adding the business court (H.B. 40, H.B. 16) changed any practice beyond the forum, and whether any 2026 special session touched chapter 64.
Amoco Production Co. v. Wood (Tex. App. Texarkana 2003) and Barnes v. Coffman (Tex. App. Houston 1988) were not read and may address receiver leases or notice.
Whether Clay Exploration was reviewed by the Supreme Court of Texas.
Checked October 6, 2026. Also in the dormant mineral rule finder.
Forced pooling
Official text cited Narrow. Under the Mineral Interest Pooling Act (Natural Resources Code chapter 102, 1977) the Railroad Commission, on application by an eligible owner, must form a unit and pool all interests when separately owned tracts lie in a common reservoir with commission set proration units, the owners have not agreed to pool, and a well has been drilled or proposed; the applicant must first have made a fair and reasonable voluntary pooling offer or the application is dismissed. It covers oil and gas only, excludes reservoirs discovered and produced before March 8, 1961 and land in which the State has an interest unless the General Land Office consents, caps units at 160 acres (oil) or 640 acres (gas) plus 10 percent, and limits the risk charge to 100 percent of drilling and completion costs.
Surface damages
No statute found No Texas statute was found that requires oil and gas operators to compensate surface owners for surface damage. Since 2007 an operator must give the surface owner written notice within 15 business days after the Railroad Commission issues a permit for a new well or a reentry (Natural Resources Code 91.753), but that subchapter states it does not affect the rule that the mineral estate is dominant (91.755).
Searched: Natural Resources Code chapter 91 (subchapter list and Subchapter Q) and chapter 92 (qualified subdivisions with designated operations sites, a surface accommodation scheme, not compensation) read via Internet Archive copies of the official site. Search results describing a surface damages chapter with compensation offers refer to introduced bills (for example 2013 HB 3600); those were not read and no such chapter was found. Relinquishment Act lands (chapter 52) were not reviewed.
Taxes
Broad personal income tax: no. Texas levies no individual income tax, because Article 8, Section 24-a of the state constitution, added November 5, 2019, bars the legislature from taxing the net incomes of individuals, so an individual's royalty income is not taxed by the state. Official text cited Source and notes.
Severance or production tax. Oil 4.6 percent of market value; gas 7.5 percent; condensate at the oil rate; small cleanup fees. Official text cited Full record: rates, exemptions, royalty owner share and sources.
Not tax advice. Rates change and the cited source controls.
Sources for the dormant mineral rule
Each source was read on the date shown. Where an official site was not available, the official page was read through a dated Internet Archive copy and that is stated.
- Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(b-1)
“(1) be a person whose residence or identity is unknown or a nonresident; and (2) have not paid taxes on the interest or rendered it for taxes during the five-year period immediately preceding the filing of the action.”
- Tex. Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 64.091(e)
“A receivership created under this subchapter continues as long as the defendant or his heirs, assigns, or personal representatives fail to appear in court in person or by agent or attorney to claim the defendant's interest.”
- Tex. Prop. Code 75.101(a)
“All mineral proceeds that are held or owing by the holder and that have remained unclaimed by the owner for longer than three years after they became payable or distributable and the owner's underlying right to receive those mineral proceeds are presumed abandoned.”
Open questions for a specialist
This review did not settle these points. They are where a Texas title attorney or landman should look first.
statutes.capitol.texas.gov and capitol.texas.gov were not available when AMR checked; text was read from Internet Archive copies dated November and December 2025. Changes after those dates were not checked.
The fate of the dormant or abandoned mineral bills found in search results (HB 2756 and HB 3016 of 1995, HB 834 of 2009, HB 5103 of 2025) was not verified on Texas Legislature Online.
Texas common law on whether a fee mineral interest can be abandoned, and adverse possession of severed minerals (Civ. Prac. and Rem. Code 16.021 to 16.034), were not reviewed.
Tax foreclosure of separately assessed mineral interests (Tax Code) and the surface owner's agency role on Relinquishment Act lands (Natural Resources Code chapter 52) were not reviewed.
What happens to receivership funds held long term in the court registry was not researched.
Common questions
Can mineral rights lapse in Texas?
A search of Texas’s official code found no dormant mineral, lapse or forfeiture statute, so an interest does not lapse through nonuse under a statute of that kind. Deeds, tax sales and title rules can still affect ownership.
Does Texas allow forced pooling?
Yes. Texas has a forced pooling statute, summarized with its citation under Forced pooling above.
Does Texas require payment for surface damage?
A search of Texas’s official code found no surface damages statute of that kind. Leases, deeds and general law can still give the surface owner a claim.
What changed
The June 2026 edition listed Texas as Does not lapse, lapse period none. Release 2026.10 replaced that entry with the reviewed rule above, and retired the June risk score and ranking for every state. Release 2026.10.1 added the deceased or unlocated owner section. See all changes.
Cite this page
American Mineral Registry. "Do Mineral Rights Expire in Texas?" U.S. Mineral Rights Law Atlas, release 2026.10.1, October 6, 2026. https:// americanmineralregistry.com/ research/ states/ do-mineral-rights-expire-in-texas
[Do Mineral Rights Expire in Texas?](https:// americanmineralregistry.com/ research/ states/ do-mineral-rights-expire-in-texas), U.S. Mineral Rights Law Atlas, American Mineral Registry, release 2026.10.1 (2026-10-06).
<a href="https:// americanmineralregistry.com/ research/ states/ do-mineral-rights-expire-in-texas">Do Mineral Rights Expire in Texas?</ a>, U.S. Mineral Rights Law Atlas, American Mineral Registry, release 2026.10.1 (2026-10-06).
@misc{amr_atlas_tx_2026101,
author = {{American Mineral Registry}},
title = {Do Mineral Rights Expire in Texas?},
howpublished = {U.S. Mineral Rights Law Atlas, release 2026.10.1},
date = {2026-10-06},
url = {https://americanmineralregistry.com/research/states/do-mineral-rights-expire-in-texas}
} TY - ELEC AU - American Mineral Registry TI - Do Mineral Rights Expire in Texas? T2 - U.S. Mineral Rights Law Atlas ET - 2026.10.1 DA - 2026/10/ 06 UR - https:/ / americanmineralregistry.com/ research/ states/ do-mineral-rights-expire-in-texas ER -
General information about statutes, not legal advice and not a title opinion. Facts about a specific interest decide the outcome. Published by American Mineral Registry, which also runs a commercial service for owners; see how the two relate.