Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on August 8, 2008 at 4:31

I agree completely.

If they people who signed before the announcement are bitter at the people now, I feel sorry for them on many accounts.

I am happy for anyone who gets to participate in the terms that are being offered now.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LP on August 7, 2008 at 8:08

I think Mr. Visconte is expressing justified frustration over the influx of opportunist touting themselves as having the skills to negotiate mineral leases for people. The 50/50 or 5 scoundrel that I referred to in my earlier post is taking advantage of a group of people who are not familiar with what should be a reasonable contingency fee. They are working people that have barely enough time to relax and watch TV at night. The issue is not that they are stupid or lazy when it comes to getting up to speed on the market value of natural gas and the skills of negotiating mineral leases. They just don't have the time in their day to do it.

I am very grateful to Mr. Visconte for bringing up this discussion. I have printed out his post and given it to some of the folks. I hope it's not too late for them to reconsider their negotiator.
I’m grateful for all of the comments on this topic. They are thought provoking and all have considerable merit. I think it’s certainly evident that one size does NOT fit all, so to speak, when it comes to when legal assistance is needed and clearly evident that common sense and caution needs to be applied.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by W T Visconte on August 7, 2008 at 9:30

Agreed and thanks. Touche on the working folks. If I had kids, worked long hours, and had to cook dinner, do homework, clean dishes, feed the pets, etc., I DEFINITELY wouldn't have the time to research matters. That's why those working folks need to join or form a neighborhood association.

As far the folks that have satisfactory minds and who have nothing but time on their hands, they'll generally get in equal amounts what they give.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nick Bellard on August 7, 2008 at 10:58

I have been reading this site every few days for several months now. To clarify my position of observation here, I am an attorney in south Louisiana who represents several large landowners from South Louisiana who have land interest in the Haynesville Shale. I do not want to spend my time in Shreveport and I have more than enought business here that allows me to fulfill my goal of being in my own bed every night. I offer these insights as my personal observations of a professional looking from the outside.

My clients that have a limited interest in the HS are mostly large family held estates that have been handed down over generations as corporations. Most of them own land all over the state and several have land in other states. In the course of representing these families I was contacted by a landman in April about a lease. I was aware, in a general since, of some rumors of potential activity in the area, and I was familiar with the Barnett situation. I maintain some contacts in the oil and gas business from my prior life as a mud engineer and then environmental compliance supervisor for Halliburton prior to law. In these circles rumors of plays such as this aren't well kept secrets.

You very well may be able to negotiate a lease on your own, but the idea is that if you feel that you are getting a fair shake make sure, but don't ever pay a percentage of anything. Contingency fees have their place in the law but not in the area of lease law. The Louisiana Supreme Court which has sole jurisdiciton over the regulation of attorneys in the state has long disallowed the use of contingency fee agreements in the area of succession (probate for non-civilian/common law types). This is due to the logic that generally most successions are the same amount of work, be they in a general range of 0 to $500,000.00 in total value. The same pleadings get filed, the same procedure is followed and in general they are probated without incident, so most attorneys charge an hourly or flat fee which I think is reasonable and fair as compensation for the time and effort put into the case. This is analagous to the area of lease law where the issues presented and the terms and clauses that an attorney has at his disposal are for the most part the same, the difference is knowing what to ask for, the experience,and knowledge.
I think contingency fee contracts in this area violate the Louisiana Lawyers Code of Professional Conduct as a fee that is "unconscionable" . I don't think this is some kind of conspiracy, but an oversite as most people in the state will never get leased for minerals, but everyone will die and most will need a succession, so it is an area that lends it self to more abuse, and more oversite.

Regardless of the fee issue remember, most people will hire a lawyer to handle a car accident case that may result in as little as $10,000.00, I think that if you are negotiating a lease that could have a major impact on the finances of you and your family for decades, that is probably worth the few hundred it may cost for a simple review by a qualified lawyer. (as an aside, car accident cases are extremely simple for attorneys, and lucrative, thats why so many advertise for them, they are the legal equivalent of the sick buffalo in the herd, easy to take down and a real good meal) O&G lease law is infinitely more complicated as it is a much less settled area of the law. Please remember as a wise old professor of mine once said, reading the mineral code is a start, but "what the law says, what it means, and what it actually does, are three distinct realities unto themselves."

Finally I have read a lot of this site over the last few months, please take most of the "advice" with a grain of salt.. Some of it is superb, at least partly, but I have found that there is a great tendency to mix Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and just plain anecdotal expertise and law into this comments. Louisiana doesn't just have unique food, our laws would

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pat on August 7, 2008 at 15:31

Nick, Thank you for taking the time to post this.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on August 7, 2008 at 19:35

If you think it is unconscionable for an attorney to charge a %, do you not agree that it is absurd for an untrained individual to take on this practice.

Isn't it ridiculous for a nurse who has obtained notoriety for her "good works" to then become an "expert" and dare charge "clients" a %.

I am in no way questioning her good works. I have gained a wealth of information that she has posted here. But I think it is completely wrong to now try to become a consultant.

I also think that some of the advise that she may be giving may hurt her in the long run if it is ever interpreted as "practicing law without a license".

My disagreement is not just with her practice but with all of the CPA's, X-Landmen, X-personal injury attorneys, X-anything other than those who have dealt with the complexities of Mineral law. As you stated so eloquently reading mineral law is one thing. In my opinion it is just the beginning.

I hope that my ego is never so large that I think that I know enough to charge anyone a % or even a fee for my information.

AS STATED BY MANY BEFORE, MOST EXPERIENCED OIL AND GAS ATTORNEY'S WILL CHARGE BY THE HOUR. WHY DO SO MANY INEXPERIENCED "NEW EXPERTS" BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD CHARGE A %. I FIND THE GALL EXTREMELY DISTASTEFUL. THEIR ACTIONS MAKE THOSE OF SOME LANDMEN SEEM MILD BY COMPARISON.

If I am correct, I believe this is what Mr. Visconte was trying to point out.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by smith1 on August 8, 2008 at 1:48

I agree totally!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hoosier Daddy on August 8, 2008 at 2:00

The percentage vs. hourly decision for a landowner will depend on the situation. Someone who owns a 1/4 acre lot probably should not engage an attorney on an hourly basis on his or her own, since the fees could easily and quickly exceed the bonus amount for that small of a parcel.

That said, I completely agree with the indictment of the "new experts"

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hoosier Daddy on August 8, 2008 at 2:10

For someone with sufficient acreage to justify the hiring of an attorney on an hourly or flat fee basis, I think it's a no-brainer. In our case, the mere suggestion that we would engage an attorney has been of tremendous economic benefit. A few years ago we were approached by a landman with a $150/acre bonus offer for our farm. We were inclined to accept, and told the landman so. We also told the landman that we would need to run everything by our lawyer in Shreveport. After that conversation we never heard from that landman again, and never had the "opportunity" to sign that lease.

We now are entertaining bonus offers worth more than 100x that $150/acre offer from 2006.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nick Bellard on August 8, 2008 at 3:14

The practice of landmen not wanting to deal with parties is a calculated move on their part, and becoming more common here in south Louisiana over the last few months. I am currently dealing with a leasing operation going on in a two parish area near here and this has been the norm from one land company in particular. This happens to be the same land services company from Lafayette which was accused of the attempted fraud of several residents in the HS. The situation was profiled on the Shreveport ABC news last week, and re-aired in Lafayette Thursday evening at 10pm. This company and several others will either not call a party with an attorney, or will have the land company attorney call the attorney. The implied threat is "If you hire an attorney to protect your rights, you will not get leased." The thing is that they usually need your lease more than you need them, even if they act like they don't. Remember, you aren't losing anything by not signing a bad lease, someone else will come along.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CR on August 8, 2008 at 4:07

You are right on with all your comments Nick. Good to have you aboard. They will come back if they want the millions of bucks that may be under you. It's a shame they use such threatening language and scare tactics to trick people. I wish the Cities, Towns, and Communities would get together with an across the board deal and say to them, "Here it is, if you don't take it you don't get our minerals and you don't get any money." This way all the BS would end, the landmen would all have to go find a new job, and everyone would get a fair deal. I'd love to see that happen.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by RAY on August 8, 2008 at 3:21

look at things from a math point of view:

I can get $15,000 / acre all by myself
I can get $27,000 / acre by paying a middleman 5%

Now, I have a choice.....$15,000 vs $25,650

WoW, such a hard choice to choose from?

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Next ›
• Page