Ok, just got the papers in the mail today. So we have a lease that says no post-production costs. Chesapeake took it out anyway. wait though, there going to give us back 50% prior June 2014, and a whooping 34% after that. Isn't that like robbing a bank and giving half and less of it back and not going to JAIL. Something is wrong. I'm opting out, how about you?

Views: 4263

Replies to This Discussion

This was the Demchak sellout.

Would someone affected by the Demchak "Settlement" please contact the last lawyer on the last page of the Hope Fellowship Church vs Chesapeake Energy, attached. 

He wrote the Complaint which I believe is the best in the Nation to date and don't expect to see any better Complaint from the lawyers living off of landowners while helping them over and over again with no plan to stop the theft. 

Would you like to stop the theft? Then make the call.  

Take a look at his work, and compare it to any other Complaint in the Nation.

Darn, forgot the attachment, so here it is below.

Attachments:

INVICTUS,

Feast your eyes on these beauties. Check Plaintiffs leases to see if you will be in the Class Action. SURE leases are included.

The DEMCHAK document is another example of Robs work.

Attachments:

Attached are: 1) A Detailed Class Action Complaint Against Chesapeake for a Bradford County Landowner, 2) Demchak Intervention Filing and 3) PA Attorney Generals Filing Related to the Demchak Settlement.

Attachments:

One more item (only 3 attachments per Reply, thank you): 4 ) PA vs Chesapeake Lawsuit

Attachments:

Does anyone have a thought on how the Attorney General's action against Chesapeake impact the class action proposed settlement?  

I see that AG filed an amicus brief opposing settlement approval based on preserving the commonwealth's right to take action, but is otherwise silent to the fairness of the settlement.  It seems to me that now that the PA AG is on record that CHK and its affiliates have employed broad deceptive  tactics the settlement terms seem less attractive than they did a few weeks ago.  

Scott

If your post is an effort to secure unchallenged your place as master of understatement . . you have succeeded beyond all doubt.

Yes, in the wake of Kane's actions Demchak is now trash.  It deserves, in its entirety,  to be tossed unceremoniously into the circular file.  Trouble is:

If the judge allows Demchak to continue, and allows the "you are in unless you opt out" provision to remain alive, then many landowners will be harmed.  This is because many landowners will not act to save themselves.  Wise landowners are opting out literally in droves.  But not all landowners are sufficiently sophisticated to understand the Demchak peril.  From the beginning it was a trap.  Now, in the wake of Kane's actions, that is doubly so.

Because I care about my fellow landowners being safeguarded from harm, I hope the judge kills Demchak dead.  It serves only the best interests of Chesapeake.

Hi Frank,

A couple of thoughts:  Isn't the need to opt out of a settlement standard in any class action? As such,do not think that in and of itself is a problem .  I don't disagree with you as to Demchak serving as a trap, as the settlement terms are a fantastic deal for Chesapeake and pretty poor for the landowner who signed a lease with belief there were to be no deductions. I do not yet know what to make of the affect of the AG's suit.  Sounds great if they win and the court determines that CHK is liable for restoration.  Seems like that would take years and tough luck for people in the interim.   I really look forward to seeing a legal analysis of that likelihood.  But, what happens of the AG loses its case?  Feels like game over for any hope for landowners to ever be treated fairly....

I take your point, Scott.  Nothing is guaranteed, and surely not so early as this.  As for the opt out, no disagreement.

After reading both of Kane's actions, I can well understand why it took her office so long to get those out.  But the delay, and the intervening silence, and all of Kane's personal problems, understandably left landowners in a quandary.  I think had Kane been able to act earlier, even if she had been able several months ago to offer an outline (no specifics) of her intent and timing, that Demchak might never even have happened.

After reading as much of the settlement paperwork as I am able and reviewing all of the legal jargon as I can it is apparent that this is a complex issue. The reason it is complicated is partially due to the legalities themselves, another is fairness and finally there is the market. And the later may drive this whole affair.

Current and future supplies of natural gas are extraordinary. Supplies have driven the price lower much to the dismay of accountants. (Follow the Leidy Hub prices for those of us in the Marcellus Shale area)Aa a result Chesapeake is losing financial ground rapidly and is desperately trying to renegotiate contracts, scramble for credit and stem hemorrageing cash flow. The Chesapeake share price dropped to $4.16 as of 12/11/2015 reflecting all of these factors.

With all of that information is it possible to hold out for a better settlement?

John, 

Agree legal issues are complex, but isn't the fairness of this really simple? It is clear that oil and gas companies took advantage of people every day and they did not negotiate leases in good faith.  This was true of many companies not just Chesapeake.  

Also do not see how the market makes this more complex in anyway.  The terms of the leases do not change w/ the market and if anything the abundance of low cost gas in the Marcellus only enhance the value of the lease rights at issue.

Scott

Uh, not so sure of all that.  Way I read it, Kane has gone after Chesapeake, and Williams, principally for their pipeline deal fraud.  My reading indicates Kane respects all, and does not seek to alter any, leases.  But she is asserting deductions taken by Chesapeake were too high, owing to a pipeline deal they did which was, in essence, done to defraud landowners.

I don't think too many other gas companies, aside from Chesapeake and Williams, pulled this particular stunt.

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service