M&P BEING SUED / CLASS-ACTION SUIT AGAINST HALCON, M&P & CX

 

Hello everyone:

                         I have not posted anything on here before. I have always just read the comments of others. I thought I would just post some thoughts. After being patient for 8 1/2 months I still have no answers like others in the south east Mercer County area. Is Halcon going to be held responsible for their actions? Are they going to be made to pay for the contracts they signed for? How qualified is M&P when it comes to representing the landowners of group 4 against a company like Halcon with deep pockets. Will we get an honest effort from M&P or will they make it as short as possible and except less than what we deserve to mitigate damages on their behalf. I have just read, in detail, the civil suit against M&P by Terra Energy LLC. Now it seems to me that the landowners not only have to worry about being pushed around by an unethical oil & gas Co, but now we have to worry about the real motives of the law firm we have to represent us. Are they going to treat clients like they treated business partners? I think if given a chance M&P will come back to the land owners after any legal actions against Halcon with a bogus report how they couldn't do much and if we continue it will tie up our lands for years, of course due to a half hearted attempt at getting us what we legally are owed.

                        I only have this attitude after listening to M&P for 8 1/2 months tell us how important it is to stick together as a group but they will break up the group at the drop of a hat to sign a little chunk to this O&G Co and another chunk to a different O&G Co. This sticking together only benefitted them by having all of us available to them for whatever size of lease they could get from any other O&G Co. After seeing an E-Mail to Terra Energy Advisors LLC from Jack Polochak describing how maybe Terra Energy should  get some leases signed by an O&G Co that are less than desirable for landowners to make it look like A Co he was partnering up with was successful in the oil and gas leasing business. That just shows me that he will sacrifice his clients profits to improve his and his associates. I think everyone should read the Lawsuit especially the landowners of group 4. Maybe I am seeing this in a sinister way and I am just swayed by how the rest of the world does things these days. Here is the link to the Lawsuit. I would like to know how many other landowners see it the way I do.

MPLawsuit.pdf

Views: 34271

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by James Brink, Esq. on March 4, 2013 at 5:46am

Kevin:  We have to bear in mind that M&P/CX are not parties to the class action.  Their role in the lawsuit is unclear and undetermined at this point and we will not know much more until discovery starts.  Indeed, just reading their website indicates that they are still attempting to represent unleased MJ4 lessors by attempting to identify another lessee. I agree that this case will most likely be settled at some point.  Even so, I think we all have a clear idea what really happened here.

Permalink Reply by Kevin Senich on March 4, 2013 at 6:50am

Jim:

Yes, I am acutely aware that M&P/CX are not a parties to the lawsuit.   

 

Permalink Reply by J Landowner on March 7, 2013 at 11:42am

The Sharon Herald had a front page story today about a new lawsuit filed in Mercer County Common Pleas Court. This time, Halcon, M&P, and CX are all being sued by the same plaintiffs as the lawsuit mentioned in this thread. It went on to say that they have abandon the Federal Court lawsuit in favor of this one in Mercer.

"They sued Halcon Energy Properties Inc., which has leased property for oil and gas drilling, and Morascyzk and Polochak, Bridgeville, and Co-eXprise Inc., Wexford, firms that market landowners’ interests to oil and gas companies in return for a fee from the bonuses paid to property owners."

 

"Although no answers have been filed in this suit, the plaintiffs had sued Halcon in federal court. They have since abandoned that suit in favor of the Mercer County suit, but Halcon answered the allegations in the federal suit by saying that not all of the prerequisites of acceptance were provided for many properties, and that Halcon was not obligated to honor all of the Mt. Jackson agreements that were submitted on a timely basis."

 

 

015334grltd9mPermalink Reply by 015334grltd9m on March 7, 2013 at 1:20pm

Sad, this is what happens when the unqualified lead millions of dollars worth of property and try to negotiate with billion dollar energy companies.

Permalink Reply by Brett Allen Morgan on March 7, 2013 at 1:21pm
I have growing evidence that is convinces me that CX/MP are the culprits here. Can't say much at the moment. I will fill you all in about 30 days from now if my him his correct
Permalink Reply by Brett Allen Morgan on March 7, 2013 at 1:22pm
*hunch NOT him
Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on March 7, 2013 at 2:00pm

Now we need to have someone post the text or a link to the text of the lawsuit by the landowners in Mercer County. I do think it is better for the landowners in Mount Jackson 4 to have both Halcon, and M&P / CX both named as defendants. It will be helpful to the landowners to have the potential villains blaming each other. If the text of the new lawsuit is filed, I hope that the attorneys who have graciously spent time analyzing the issues and posing questions about this fiasco will continue to offer comments which may help to enlighten the rest of us. First question: Did the attorneys for the landowners not think things through carefully when they filed their class action suit in Federal Court? Question 2: What is potentially gained and lost by abandoning the Federal lawsuit in favor of a suit in Mercer County? One thought that occurs to me is that jurors from Mercer County might have more sympathy for their neighbors who seem to have been screwed over by someone? In the meantime, the M&P / CX juggernaut rolls on in Venango County and elsewhere, apparently unabashed and unashamed! I again request that the text of the lawsuit be published as well as the responsive pleadings by the defendants when they are available. Hopefully someone may be able to do this?

Permalink Reply by Kevin Senich on March 7, 2013 at 2:16pm

Mr. Orr:

Unless the Mercer County Court has online document retrieval (and very few do), someone would have to go to county courthouse and obtain copies of the pleadings and papers.  The documents are public information.  Unlike federal court documents, they are just not (usually) available online.

This certainly is an interesting development.

 

Permalink Reply by ShaleAdvice (Steven C. Townsend) on March 8, 2013 at 1:44am

I'm not sure why CX and MP were not named defendants from the start, but it looks like they have them now. 

Attachments:
Permalink Reply by James Brink, Esq. on March 7, 2013 at 3:01pm
They do not have a e-docket in Mercer. We will try to get the filing through some contacts we have there. I will check the federal docket to see if it was remanded to state court or if the federal suit was indeed dismissed.
Permalink Reply by James Brink, Esq. on March 8, 2013 at 8:02am

I have obtained the Letter of Intent between M&P, CX and Halcon.  It is attached.  You will note that there is a header on each page indicating that the document was filed in U.S. District Court as an attachment to a pleading.  This means that this document was not purloined and no confidentialiy provisions were violated in either obtaining this document or disseminating it.  It is public record and is being regarded as such.

 

I will let the readers review this document and draw their own conclusions.  It is rather straightforward, but it is significant that the date of the LOI is June 2, 2012.

 

I will also note that the form Order for Payment attached as an exhibit to the LOI does include the word "geology" which seems to be missing in the Order of Payment that was attached to the lease package executed by the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

 

The entire Mercer County suit is over 85 pages long.  I will need to look at it to see if it needs to be broken up before it can be posted.  My partner is much more computer literate than I, so he may have to assume this task for me.

Attachments:
Permalink Reply by James Brink, Esq. on March 8, 2013 at 8:36am

I am attaching the entire Mercer County complaint.  It is over 85 pages long, so be aware of this when you try to download it.  Again, it is all public record, so don't worry about receiving nasty emails from anybody regarding viewing these documents.

Attachments:

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service