I had a lease with SouthWest and they turned around and sold it or traded it to Chesapeake. The lease was for 30 acres in Herick Twp. Now that Chesapeake has it they claim my lease is satisfied because they used 1.5 acres I own in Standing Stone Twp that wasn't in my lease. Because of the legal wording they use in these leases and the + or - deal they claim its all legal. There is a max acrage clause in my lease for around 600 acres in my unit. Now they want to amend my lease to allow 1280 acres in my unit or there not going to use anymore of my property. Does this sound right?

 

Sorry No Spell Check

Views: 601

Replies to This Discussion

Porbably they are right.

Check, do you haveea pogh clause? that protects freeing non drilled land.

An idea, gas prices may be much better in yr 5-10 

No I don't

Dale

Without a Pugh clause your ice is very thin.  Very thin.

Can you post here the controlling language from your lease.  There still might be hope, but cannot say without seeing the binding language CHK is claiming.  What specific language in your lease is CHK using to claim a right to unitize everything you own?

And what does you lawyer say?  You did use a lawyer to prepare your leases . . . I hope!!

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service