Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by William C. Morrison on December 19, 2013 at 2:53

There you go.  I love Louisiana Code Napoleon.  It says what it means and thus the mineral laws are quite clear as to who owns what, when and where and for how long.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bryan Brennion on December 18, 2013 at 9:05

have read the document about the Grappe Grant in the Caddo courthouse, a decision by the US Supreme Court

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on December 18, 2013 at 9:19

Kind of a shady deal but it is interesting history.  As is the Larkin Edwards grant.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bryan Brennion on December 18, 2013 at 11:33

have you read the Court's decision?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on December 18, 2013 at 13:40

No.  Is it worth the time?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on December 18, 2013 at 13:48

The Dolet Grant was more interesting.

Permalink Reply by Bryan Brennion on December 18, 2013 at 15:48

Yes, sent message with some details

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on December 11, 2013 at 16:58

Sometimes it's just difficult reading the script.

There's definitely something to it.  It ain't easy and sure isn't SIMPLE.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dino Roberts on December 12, 2013 at 11:56

Here is how it could go, with the operator and landman/attorney taking the path of least resistance; 

1. Lease both parties, pay bonus to cover yourself and basically have a “protection” lease; pay bonus of 25% to one party and bonus of 100% to the other party; (cheaper than fighting over it for now);
2. Drill the well and if the well is dry, uneconomic and plugged, then problem solved;
3. Drill the well and if the well is completed as a decent producer, the title attorney can put a Title Requirement in his memo/division order title opinion, as to this tract and require the record title holders to work it out, in the form of a Stipulation of Interest and Cross Conveyance between the parties; until such time this is done, the operator can suspend the interest and hold the money or move the money to the registry of the court and deduct any attorney fees incurred by the operator from the amounts held or paid, to offset their efforts and hassle of the title issue and court fees;
4. Good luck suing the operator and forcing them to do anything other than this once the leases have been signed in #1 above;

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on December 12, 2013 at 16:20

Dino, I don't get your logic? You gonna sign someone and pay 100%? when you don't know what they own? Maybe I missed something.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by adubu on December 13, 2013 at 1:08

Dino--- the 25% is not in question since 25% is conveyed per deed but it's the 75% in question which is not clarified in deed -- so following your suggestion you sign both to lease the Grantor 75% and Grantee then at 100% bonus then company Title attorney would give Title opinion at DIVISION ORDER 25 to grantee 75% grantor or 100% to grantee and nothing for Grantor which would then result in Grantor heirs going to court -- is this what you are saying?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dino Roberts on December 13, 2013 at 4:39

thanks and i guess what i am trying to say, is that when a question of ownership arises with an operator, when planing to drill a well or in the heat of a leasing play, everyone and anyone with potential ownership will be leased;

the operator does not need to know what everyone owns in a tract, as long as they get them all leased; (they usually try their best to figure it out, but when in doubt just lease everyone); 

in this example here, they could lease both parties and even pay each of them for 100% of the minerals; as long as they "over lease" and not "under lease" they are covered; drill a well and claim that the title is unclear and put all parties in suspense, pending the outcome of litigation or the cleaning up of the title between the mineral owners;

as long as the operator has leases to cover all parties involved, they can drill a well, operate the well and keep the royalty in suspense and the lease agreements allow them to take this path;

they will send out a letter before royalty is paid, that says: Sorry folks, we are not sure who to pay or how much your own, so therefore the interests will remain in suspense until we are furnished with evidence of ownership or agreements between the parties as to who owns what etc...

the last thing the operator/title attorney wants to happen is to interprete a document, pay the royalty, then find out later they were wrong and then have to pay twice;

lease em all...drill the well...then throw it all in suspense and let the mineral/royalty owners fight it out;

this happens all of the time and operators use "title issues" to hold money, but not saying this will happen in the example here, as i am not versed in the case law in a particular situation such as this, but just hoping for the best and planning for the worst!

and showing how an operator might handle this situation and keep their hands clean from much liability and the potential exposure of paying royalty to the wrong crowd; 

sorry if i have wandered off tract and not answered the base question as to who owns the interests in question, that would require the check of Texas case law or examples in the Texas Property Code, to see if anything like this has come up and been litigated and the outcome of same;

 

  

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next ›
• Page