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 Rockjul on February 13, 2013 at 4:10pm

 Daniel Rupert  

Sounds like you have a very good grasp on the situation. Good Luck. And the one ones on this site do seem to have a passion for helping the unfortunate landowners who got sucked in by the lease promises given by an unscrupulous group. If I have not said it yet here is a thank you to all of you for spreading the knowledge you have in the areas the rest of us are not familiar with.

Permalink Reply by Daniel Rupert on February 13, 2013 at 4:20pm

@ ROCK'

Thanks for the well wishes! I also am thankful for all the individuals that share on this site. A special shout out to Mr.Townsend and Mr. Brink...thanks for being real...God Bless you both!

Permalink Reply by Rockjul on February 13, 2013 at 1:01pm

Michael R:

                 I agree with you. I even contacted Halcon directly after the news they would not fund some of the leases. I talked to a gentleman who was in charge of this area and asked him why after saying they would take everything in mercer county that CX & M&P signed they decided to not fund a good portion of the leases. He denied the fact they would take all of the leases and ask "did you ever see a representative from Halcon at the meetings who said they would take all properties signed in mercer county" There was never a Halcon rep at any of the meetings I was at. The halcon rep said he would find out what was going on and call me back but unsurprising to me he never called back.

               I think this was a calculated manouver between CX and M&P to rush people through get them signed before they realized what just happened. I would back anyone who thought we should look into legal options against CX and M&P for intentionaly misrepresenting the facts of what they were saying to everyone at the meetings and what the lease really meant. at all the meetings CX and M&P had representatives but never Halcon maybe that should have thrown up a red flag but this was new to most of the land owners and we relied on the "EXPERTS" CX & M&P to have our interests at heart. I do not have a very large plot of land but I really would like to see those landowners who have 20,30,40 acres and more get an acceptable outcome and maybe a little satisfaction seeing the culprits pay for what they caused.  

Permalink Reply by Rockjul on February 13, 2013 at 1:31pm

I recieved a call from Jeremy at M&P  2 days ago regaurding an e-mail I sent the law firm Sunday the 10th. The e-mail was asking questions like how many acres have been funded by Halcon in our Group (Group 4) how many people have dropped out of the group, how many seperate groups were signed to different O&G co's after Halcon pulled out and other questions. I will be calling him back to get some questions answered. Should I be asking any other questions regauding the lease papers or is there a question someone else wants me to ask?   

Permalink Reply by James Brink, Esq. on February 13, 2013 at 2:59pm
Rock: on the MP website under the Mt Jackson 4 group they mention that they will keep the group apprised of the lawsuit against Halcon. You can go there and see it for yourself. My question is: What lawsuit?
Permalink Reply by Rockjul on February 13, 2013 at 3:19pm

I will have to ask Jeremy from M&P about that. I was not aware of any Lawsuit either. I am going to try and call them tomorrow on my Lunch break. I will post what he says about the Lawsuit, if in fact there is one.

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on February 13, 2013 at 1:32pm

I would advise any of you who are thinking about an action against M&P to find a competent lawyer. Ask specifically about whether he or she has handled any similar cases and with what results. A good lawyer will spend not too much of your money evaluating the facts before suit is filed. He or she should be willing to tell you what the risks of a successful outcome are. A bad lawyer will tell you that you have a great case, not discuss with you any weaknesses, and if the result is bad blame it on "the stupid judge" or a "stupid jury". This really does happen. Forewarned is forearmed. I would not wish to see any landowner get raped by lawyers twice. To all you good lawyers, do not take offense. A good lawyer might take the case on a contingent fee agreement, such that you paid him only a percentage of the recovery. If he gets you no recovery, you owe him nothing! 

Permalink Reply by ShaleAdvice (Steven C. Townsend) on February 13, 2013 at 1:49pm
Agreed Sam. I get calls almost daily from landowners who want to get out of their lease that they signed 5 years ago for $3 to $500 an acre. I unfortunately have to tell them that we cannot litigate bad bargains. Just because you paid sticker price for your car and your neighbor paid less than invoice doesn't mean you purchase is invalid.

I have reviewed more leases that were signed in haste than I care to think about and usually it was a bad bargain. However if it is true what happened with those landowners in the Halcon/M&P deal then I welcome those landowners to contact me. I'll review the documents and/or marketing agreements and give you an opinion as to whether you may have a claim. Until the documents are reviewed, we are all speculating.
Permalink Reply by ShaleAdvice (Steven C. Townsend) on February 13, 2013 at 1:35pm
Take a look at this story and see if it rings a bell. In this case the landowners' attorney cut a deal with the O&G company and then told the landowner that they found a buyer for their minerals. Sound familiar?

The get in, get rich, and get out days are over for these people.


Couple sues attorneys over lease
July 7, 2012
By DEANNE JOHNSON - Staff Writer (djohnson@mojonews.com) , Morning Journal News
Save | Post a comment |
LISBON - A couple filed a lawsuit Monday against their Lisbon attorneys, who they claim failed to handle their mineral rights lease properly, costing them a signing bonus and future royalty dollars from Chesapeake Exploration.

John and Brenda Bica, owners of 10.65 acres in Middleton Township, further claim John P. Ward and Jerry J. Ward, both of the Ward Law Offices on Beaver Street, had a contract with Chesapeake Exploration compensating the attorneys when their clients signed leases. Additionally, the lawsuit continues that the Ward Law Offices, Dale Property Services Penn LLC (DPS Penn) and Chesapeake Exploration conspired to induce property owners to sign oil and gas leases through them, thus eliminating competitive and possibly more lucrative contracts with other companies.
Permalink Reply by Rockjul on February 13, 2013 at 1:50pm

  

ShaleAdvice:

                  Probably too soon to know how the Bica's Made out and if any precedence was set.

Permalink Reply by ralph monico on February 13, 2013 at 2:41pm

Rockjul,

I think you are correct that it's unlikely that an adjudication has been reached in the Bica case.  Also, a decision in an Ohio case/court wouldn't necessarily have any impact (or value as precedent) in a Pennsylvania court. 

Nevertheless, the Bica complaint would be interesting to read. 

Permalink Reply by Rockjul on February 13, 2013 at 2:54pm

Ralph Monico:

               You are probably correct about the impact in the Pennsylvania Court System. I just don't know how closely the states work together with new cases like the ones that will be popping up because of the problems in the Oil & Gas Industriy with respect to leases.  

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service