The “Heirs of the Original Patentee” Claim: A Texas Oil & Gas Zombie That Won’t Die

Every few years, South Texas landowners get a version of the same phone call:

“We represent heirs of the original patentee of this ranch. The land was never properly conveyed. The minerals were never reserved. We’re preparing to sue for possession.”

I got that call again on Friday from a non-lawyer claiming to represent “a group of heirs” to a very famous South Texas ranch. The pitch leaned heavily on history, ancestry, and the supposed legal weight of an original land grant. I receive a version of this phone call every couple of months. None of that makes the claim viable. And I’ve heard this before.

South Texas History Is Complicated. Title Law Isn’t

South Texas land titles often trace back to Spanish and Mexican land grants, confirmed by the Republic of Texas and later patented by the State of Texas. As American settlers began to settle South Texas, they often took advantage of Spanish and Mexican landowners using a new language and new legal system. That’s led to long term feelings of dispossession in the region that have never gone away. That history is real, and it is complex.

What is not complex is how Texas courts treat title today.

Once land passed into private ownership, it became subject to the same rules that govern every other tract in Texas:

• Conveyances are done by deed;
• Severances or reservations of minerals can be done only if expressly stated; and
• Ownership is determined by the recorded chain of title, not lineage.

There is no special exemption for colonial-era grants. Courts do not freeze ownership in time simply because a tract is old. History explains how title began. Recorded instruments determine who owns it now.

The Fowler Episode: This Theory Was Already Put on Trial. It lost

Much of the modern “heirs of the original patentee” narrative can be traced to the work of Eileen McKenzie Fowler, a disbarred Texas attorney who promoted heirship based mineral claims tied to Spanish and Mexican land grants.

Fowler told descendants that:

• minerals were never conveyed unless expressly mentioned;
• Railroad Commission records showing “unknown” owners supported ancestral ownership; and
• Heirs could recover royalties or ownership based on lineage alone.

Those theories didn’t just fail quietly.

They were so absurd that they attracted legislative scrutiny.

In 2013, the Legislature convened the Texas Unclaimed Mineral Proceeds Commission to investigate unclaimed mineral proceeds and the claims being marketed to heirs.

After years of hearings and testimony, the Commission rejected the legal premises outright:

• Texas deeds convey minerals unless they reserve them.
• Lineage does not substitute for title.
• The claims being sold to heirs by people like Ms. Fowler were legally unsound.

Fowler ultimately recovered nothing for the people she signed up – despite collecting fees – and was later disbarred.

Today’s pitches are usually the same theory with a new salesman.

Why the Theory Sounds Persuasive 

These claims survive because they exploit three common misunderstandings:

1. The Deed Didn’t Mention Minerals

In Texas, silence means minerals passed with the land. Reservations must be express. This is not a novel idea.

2. The State Regulatory Agency Shows Unknown Owners

Regulatory or comptroller records don’t define title. They reflect payment problems, which can be as simple as an unknown address. They do not address ownership rights.

3. The Land Was Originally Granted to Our Ancestor

So what? Can’t he sell it?

Unless you can show:

• a mineral reservation,
• preserved through every conveyance,
• and never released, conveyed, partitioned, or lost through probate,

there is no claim.

Why Landowners Should Treat These Calls Seriously But Not Fearfully

While these claims are junk, they can still be disruptive:

• they get recorded;
• they cloud title; and
• they force responses.

Landowners should take them seriously enough to involve counsel, but not seriously enough to assume there’s merit.

When you strip away the history lesson and the heir charts, what’s left is almost always:

• no reservation,
• no surviving mineral interest, and
• no chain of title to support the story.