M Thomas
  • Business Owner
Share

M Thomas's Groups

M Thomas's Discussions

Automatic Vesting of 1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act - Recent Court Cases

There is a new Belmont County case, which speaks extensively about the 1989 ODMA, automatic vesting, and the nature of the vested right that it gave surface owners.It came out last October…Continue

Started Jan 16, 2014

1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties
196 Replies

The 1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act has now been applied by 6 Judges in 6 different counties.Tuscawaras - Wendt v Dickerson - Feb 21, 2013Monroe - Eisenbarth v Reusser - June 6, 2013Jefferson - Shannon…Continue

Tags: 1989, act, mineral, dormant, ohio

Started this discussion. Last reply by Dee Nov 8, 2015.

Another Judge affirms the "automatic" nature of the 1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act and applies it in a recent case
2 Replies

So far all cases that have decided on the 1989 version of the Ohio Dormant Mineral Act in the state of Ohio seem to have unanimously concurred that the 1989 is automatic and that it is to be applied…Continue

Started this discussion. Last reply by Philip Brutz Dec 19, 2014.

Court Rules 1989 Version of Dormant Mineral Act Vested Mineral Rights in Surface Owner
43 Replies

Just saw this new case concerning the Ohio Dormant Mineral Acthttp://www.ohiodormantmineralact.com/Wendt v DickersonIt seems like any mineral…Continue

Started this discussion. Last reply by E Johnson Mar 28, 2013.

Gifts Received

Gift

M Thomas has not received any gifts yet

Give a Gift

 

M Thomas's Page

Latest Activity

Dee replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"THE QUESTIONS: A. The Certified QuestionsFor the reasons set forth above, the undersigned certifies the followingquestions of state law to the Supreme Court of Ohio pursuant to Rule 9.01 of theRules of Practice of the Supreme Court of Ohio:1) Is the…"
Nov 8, 2015
deutchen replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"I find it encouraging from a mineral owners standpoint that they interpreted a title transaction so liberally. I think this lends hope that they may consider a reference to previously separated mineral rights by volume & page in a deed as a…"
Nov 8, 2015
Dee replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"Nov. 5th from the Ohio Supreme Court log.  (Chesapeake and Buell) I cannot open the pdf due to computers problems. Here is the link if anyone is interested. http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Clerk/ecms/#/caseinfo/2014/0067 "
Nov 8, 2015
Bluflame replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"  From a reliable source, I read speculation that all of the various issues revolving around the Dormant Minerals Act(s) via several cases pending before the Ohio Supreme Court will be decided simultaneously. That makes intuitive sense since…"
Feb 15, 2015
Philip Brutz replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"Ohio Supreme Court Schedules Oral Arguments in Walker and Corban http://w***********/walker-and-corban Krugliak, Wilkins, Griffiths & Dougherty Co., L.P.A. written by Gregory W. Watts, Ryan W. Reaves practice areas Oil, Gas & Mineral…"
Feb 15, 2015
evan replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"That depends , are you the surface owner that's trying to claim them or do you have mineral rights that were reserved long ago. ? If it's the latter then it may not be to good for you. .  "
Feb 15, 2015
Bonnie Crawford replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"I hate to seem stupid but this is all confusing to me. My family has mineral rights in Belmont Co. So is this Ohio Dormant Act a good thing or a bad thing for us. Bonnie"
Feb 15, 2015
bessieblues replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"Hopefully Harrison County courthouse will catch wind of this latest decision."
Dec 31, 2014
Philip Brutz replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
Dec 30, 2014
Philip Brutz replied to M Thomas's discussion 'Another Judge affirms the "automatic" nature of the 1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act and applies it in a recent case'
"http://w***********/ohio-dma?utm_source=Utica+Journal+%2348&utm_campaign=Oil+and+Gas+Newsletter&utm_medium=email Seventh District Court of Appeals Reaffirms Fixed Look Back Period Under The 1989 Version of Ohio's Dormant Mineral…"
Dec 19, 2014
m.jones replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"yes, there is a lot to take in from it all."
Nov 10, 2014
deutchen replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"Perhaps the most important case before the Ohio supreme court is Corban v Chesapeake. This may determine this very important matter once & for all. Read about it…"
Nov 4, 2014
m.jones replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"M. Thomas have you heard any more about the Supreme Court hearings? Is there another sight that has info about other cases going to Appellate Court? Seems like it is a stand still at this point."
Nov 4, 2014
M Thomas replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"The 5th District applied the 1989 version of the DMA in Wendt v Dickerson. Both the 5th and 7th compromise the territory of the Utica Shale formation. http://www.ohiodormantmineralact.com/wendt-v-dickerson-5th-district/"
Oct 17, 2014
Dott replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"I know some of this has already been discussed OH: Recent 7th District DMA Decisions POSTED ON OCTOBER 2, 2014 BY VORYS Email This Print Recently, the Seventh District Court of Appeals ruled on two cases involving the 1989 and 2006 versions…"
Oct 3, 2014
deutchen replied to M Thomas's discussion '1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act now applied by 6 Judges in 6 different Counties'
"you can read about supreme court case number 2014-0804, corban v chesapeake below. This is the case that will decide this issue once & for all. The merit briefs of both sides are here to…"
Oct 2, 2014

Profile Information

What is your role?
Business Owner
Which state(s) are you following?
West Virginia, Ohio
What shale plays do you follow?
Marcellus, Utica

Comment Wall

You need to be a member of GoMarcellusShale.com: Discussing the Marcellus & Utica to add comments!

Join GoMarcellusShale.com: Discussing the Marcellus & Utica

  • No comments yet!
 
 
 

Click Here!

Local Groups

© 2016   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

advertisements