In Clifton v. Johnson, the Texas Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a 1951 royalty deed conveying “1/128 (1/16 of the usual 1/8 royalty)” creates a fixed 1/128 royalty, not a floating interest.
This decision is significant because it marks the first time the Court found that deed language can rebut the presumption established in Van Dyke v. Navigator Group, which generally treats double fractions as indicating a floating royalty tied to future lease terms.
The Court emphasized that the deed’s explicit multiplication into a single fraction (1/128)—repeated throughout the instrument—demonstrated clear intent for a fixed royalty. It also noted that decades of consistent treatment by the parties supported this interpretation.