PA Supreme Court - Title Washing - Herder Spring Hunting Club v. Harry and Anna Keller - GoMarcellusShale.com2024-03-29T12:45:41Zhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/forum/topics/pa-supreme-court-title-washing-herder-spring-hunting-club-v-harry?commentId=2274639%3AComment%3A668901&feed=yes&xn_auth=noNote to the reader:
The itali…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2015-03-31:2274639:Comment:6698212015-03-31T14:03:30.354ZFrank Walkerhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/FrankWalker
<p>Note to the reader:</p>
<p>The <em>italicized</em> portion, below, is new.</p>
<p></p>
<p>I had an additional thought on this matter this morning and I want to title it and add it here:</p>
<p></p>
<p>Royalty Owner Federal Tax Jeopardy</p>
<p></p>
<p>Royalty owners are best served, from a Federal tax standpoint, when their royalties are paid by the gas company and received by them in an ongoing way, as their natural gas is conveyed to market and sold. Royalty owners are harmed and penalized…</p>
<p>Note to the reader:</p>
<p>The <em>italicized</em> portion, below, is new.</p>
<p></p>
<p>I had an additional thought on this matter this morning and I want to title it and add it here:</p>
<p></p>
<p>Royalty Owner Federal Tax Jeopardy</p>
<p></p>
<p>Royalty owners are best served, from a Federal tax standpoint, when their royalties are paid by the gas company and received by them in an ongoing way, as their natural gas is conveyed to market and sold. Royalty owners are harmed and penalized when their royalties, for any reason (including reasons which are reasonable and valid), are accumulated over time and later paid out to them by the gas company in a lump sum.</p>
<p>The reasons for this are as follows:</p>
<p>First, Federal tax law no longer provides, as once it did, for income averaging. When you receive a huge lump of payment income all at once, your tax <span><em>rate</em></span> jumps.</p>
<p>Second, older royalty owners on Medicare who receive a lump of income will see their health insurance costs adjusted upward in a significant way.</p>
<p><em>Third, royalty owners accessing health insurance via the ACA (aka, Obamacare) could find themselves with a lower subsidy, or none at all, when income for a given year exceeds ACA thresholds. And indeed generally, for persons subject to the ACA, penalties are greater in the "out" years than they are at present. So lumped, delayed royalty income is not a good thing.</em></p>
<p></p>
<p>No gas company can reasonably be expected to pay out royalty payments, difficult if not impossible for them to claw back, when there is uncertainty regarding the rightful recipients of those payments; the kind of uncertainty created, for example, by this<em>Herder Spring</em> litigation. The natural and understandable tendency of gas companies, in such circumstances, would be to withhold our payments until there is <strong><em>final </em></strong>resolution of whatever issue it might be causing the uncertainty. Adding to this tendency is the unfairness that in most instances there is no requirement for the gas company to pay us interest on retained royalties. </p>
<p>The point of this post:</p>
<p>When royalties are withheld, then later paid to us in a lump sum, we are not necessarily winners made whole by that action. There remain the matters of increased taxes and costs, and lost interest. Those aspects are not ones we easily can overcome.</p> Understood, Bonefish. Those…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2015-03-27:2274639:Comment:6690092015-03-27T21:50:31.023ZFrank Walkerhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/FrankWalker
<p>Understood, Bonefish. Those one-year-olds will get you every time! :-)</p>
<p>As I wrote earlier my involvement with respect to this issue, unlike your own, is not personal at this time. I'll use that as my excuse for having fallen asleep at the switch. I'm merely here, at least for now, to raise awareness. So I'm very grateful to you for having posted regarding this latest development, which I find significant.</p>
<p>I am respectful that opinions on this matter, in the overall, run…</p>
<p>Understood, Bonefish. Those one-year-olds will get you every time! :-)</p>
<p>As I wrote earlier my involvement with respect to this issue, unlike your own, is not personal at this time. I'll use that as my excuse for having fallen asleep at the switch. I'm merely here, at least for now, to raise awareness. So I'm very grateful to you for having posted regarding this latest development, which I find significant.</p>
<p>I am respectful that opinions on this matter, in the overall, run hot and heavy on both sides. I do not take sides today, though if my own mineral rights ever should become threatened I certainly would take sides.</p>
<p>What I found most interesting in your post is your reference to the possibility of a SCOTUS appeal. Of course I realize the amount of money on the line here is nearly beyond imagination. But I had hope, and to be honest I had assumed, that the PA Supreme Court would be the end of the road for this litigation. If the SCOTUS becomes involved many of us, myself certainly included, might be dead before this is finally decided once and for all!</p> Hi Frank,
I didn't mean to ma…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2015-03-27:2274639:Comment:6690072015-03-27T20:21:24.898ZBonefishhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/JDominick
<p>Hi Frank,</p>
<p>I didn't mean to make a blank post. It was really late and the one-year old was title-washing my sleep.</p>
<p>The post I meant to put up was to thank you for starting a Keller thread, and to post the link that you posted. So, thanks.</p>
<p>I have read and studied both briefs (Amicus and Appellant). Pretty dense, but there you have it. We'll see what the Attorney for Herder says in their brief. I wonder if Herder's attorney is the same David Mason that opined above in…</p>
<p>Hi Frank,</p>
<p>I didn't mean to make a blank post. It was really late and the one-year old was title-washing my sleep.</p>
<p>The post I meant to put up was to thank you for starting a Keller thread, and to post the link that you posted. So, thanks.</p>
<p>I have read and studied both briefs (Amicus and Appellant). Pretty dense, but there you have it. We'll see what the Attorney for Herder says in their brief. I wonder if Herder's attorney is the same David Mason that opined above in this thread, seems likely. </p>
<p>Gonna vent a little….While I think everyone knows where I stand on this issue, and it is anyone's guess how the SCOPA will decide, I find my sanity reinforced by the fact that the highest court in PA is paying attention to this Russian/Venezuelan style taking. As I mentioned in another post, my family's mineral rights were given by my late-grandfather to my dad and uncle as a college graduation present. And then they gave it to me shortly after the end of my enlistment. It wasn't worth anything at the time. But it meant something to each of us. It tied us to our heritage in PA and to our family history from a very different time. And then the lawsuit came, and the O&G Companies stopped returning calls. What we didn’t know, was that people were ignoring our reservation, pencil whipping adverse possession quiet-title actions, misinterpreting laws and cases, just so they could make $5/acre leasing amongst their friends, and then selling the idea to the operators (who now stand to lose, a lot.) And nobody, including posters to this forum, could explain how or why this was possible. When they have tried to explain how this taking worked, their explanation just caused my sense of reason, logic and justice to spin-out. </p>
<p>Rumor, wink, nod, "trust me", "you just don't understand", "that's the way we have always done it", "100 years of jurisprudence", Pennsylvania is just weird, In Rem, “Proctor Rule”, you abandoned it, or you failed to report the unreportable. These were the vaporous, moving arguments being made. And if this really was happening, why was there such a vacuum of law, cases, policies, regulations, notices, recordings, commissioner’s records, etc validating the process? This is a taking without documentation. It’s a black hole that can’t be defended against (Tioga doesn’t have a single example of a duly recorded severance being reported for assessment, neither does Centre). There is what the statute says and a handful of cases that tackle the issue stating that is illegal; for obvious reasons.</p>
<p>If I were conspiratorial (I am not, but tempting), I would say Dr. Evil himself couldn’t have come up with a better caper than title wash. Was this Birrell’s plan? I don’t really think so. I think it evolved out of necessity, economics, bad luck, a room full of lawyers in Williamsport and absent subsurface owners. And some folks are believing it. Maybe I am nuts.</p>
<p>So now the Kellers are representing my thoughts, in front of the Supreme Court. And if they lose here, I expect an application for Writ of Certiori from the SCOTUSA. And as mentioned in the brief, years and years of costly “house to house” litigation over property specific chain of title. </p>
<p>Or they can settle it now by enforcing what the law says.</p>
<p>Bonefish</p> Actually, title washing does…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2015-03-27:2274639:Comment:6689082015-03-27T14:24:54.438ZJack Younghttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/JackYoung
<p>Actually, title washing does apply to other states. New York had essentially the same rule, and it's never been challenged.</p>
<p>Actually, title washing does apply to other states. New York had essentially the same rule, and it's never been challenged.</p> Thanks to Bonefish I now can…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2015-03-27:2274639:Comment:6691312015-03-27T13:02:32.950ZFrank Walkerhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/FrankWalker
<p>Thanks to Bonefish I now can post this link to the brief itself:</p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="https://sadronblog.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/herder-spring-amicus-brief-final.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Herder-Spring-amicus-brief</a></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em>It's only my opinion</em></span>, but I think any PA in-the-shale landowner should read that brief.</p>
<p>Note the brief is dated March 9, 2015. I totally missed it so again special thanks to…</p>
<p>Thanks to Bonefish I now can post this link to the brief itself:</p>
<p></p>
<p><a rel="nofollow" href="https://sadronblog.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/herder-spring-amicus-brief-final.pdf" target="_blank">Herder-Spring-amicus-brief</a></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em>It's only my opinion</em></span>, but I think any PA in-the-shale landowner should read that brief.</p>
<p>Note the brief is dated March 9, 2015. I totally missed it so again special thanks to Bonefish for bringing this to our attention.</p>
<p>Bonefish also has brought to our attention this more comprehensive website:</p>
<p><a href="http://hoytroyalty.com/category/hoyt-royalty-news/" target="_blank">Website for Herder-Spring news</a></p> Bonefish
I do not know why yo…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2015-03-27:2274639:Comment:6689012015-03-27T12:37:40.730ZFrank Walkerhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/FrankWalker
<p>Bonefish</p>
<p>I do not know why you posted a blank entry here, but I'm glad you did. Once again I had forgotten about this important issue winding its way through our PA courts at an absolutely <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>glacial</strong></span> pace. Forgetting was easy. Metal rusts faster than resolution of this important matter is making progress.</p>
<p>Anyway, I have searched for updates and found little new. But I did find this:</p>
<p></p>
<p><em>March 13,…</em></p>
<p>Bonefish</p>
<p>I do not know why you posted a blank entry here, but I'm glad you did. Once again I had forgotten about this important issue winding its way through our PA courts at an absolutely <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>glacial</strong></span> pace. Forgetting was easy. Metal rusts faster than resolution of this important matter is making progress.</p>
<p>Anyway, I have searched for updates and found little new. But I did find this:</p>
<p></p>
<p><em>March 13, 2015, 3:36 PM ET -- Several trusts and corporations with nearly 200,000 acres of collective subsurface gas and oil rights in north-central Pennsylvania asked the state Supreme Court on Monday to overturn a ruling that a tax sale of surface rights also conveyed previously separate subsurface rights.</em><br/><br/><em>The amici filed a brief supporting the heirs of the Keller family, who lost the gas rights on a 406-acre property in Centre County, Pennsylvania.</em></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>That's all I have because that information appears on a pay website . . and I did not pay. Still, it does tell us the matter remains active and large interests remain very much involved.</span></p> Hi Everyone. I just found th…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2015-03-27:2274639:Comment:6691222015-03-27T07:23:14.516ZBonefishhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/JDominick
<div class="description xj_comment_editor xg_user_generated" id="desc_2274639Comment668990"><p>Hi Everyone. I just found that Frank created a desperate thread. Thanks Frank.</p>
Check Hoyt Royalty's page. It has been updated with briefs. Pretty technical, but it is all laid out.<br></br>
<p><a href="http://hoytroyalty.com/category/hoyt-royalty-news/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">HERE</a></p>
I am going to keep all my future responses here.…</div>
<div class="description xj_comment_editor xg_user_generated" id="desc_2274639Comment668990"><p>Hi Everyone. I just found that Frank created a desperate thread. Thanks Frank.</p>
Check Hoyt Royalty's page. It has been updated with briefs. Pretty technical, but it is all laid out.<br/>
<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://hoytroyalty.com/category/hoyt-royalty-news/" target="_blank">HERE</a></p>
I am going to keep all my future responses here.</div>
<div class="description xj_comment_editor xg_user_generated">Enjoy.</div> Interesting. Thanks for the…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2014-11-20:2274639:Comment:6419412014-11-20T22:06:04.199ZHarrison Runhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/HarrisonRun
<p>Interesting. Thanks for the post. But you say the LAND owed the taxes. If the mineral right were never taxed and the LAND was responsible for the tax, as you said, (given that the definition of land is "surface" <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/land" target="_blank">http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/land</a>), then is it fair, or more to the point, legal, to take someone's mineral rights if the surface owner doesn't pay? It seems like they are actually different…</p>
<p>Interesting. Thanks for the post. But you say the LAND owed the taxes. If the mineral right were never taxed and the LAND was responsible for the tax, as you said, (given that the definition of land is "surface" <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/land" target="_blank">http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/land</a>), then is it fair, or more to the point, legal, to take someone's mineral rights if the surface owner doesn't pay? It seems like they are actually different properties to me. . </p> Thanks for the very well-writ…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2014-11-20:2274639:Comment:6418472014-11-20T21:33:16.710ZDavid Masonhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/DavidMason
<p>Thanks for the very well-written and expressed reply, Frank. I was not intending to disparage your OP, and agree it was written with respect for both sides of this issue. My post was a simple attempt to explain the how and why to those who viewed the HERDER SPRING decision as unfair.</p>
<p>Thanks for the very well-written and expressed reply, Frank. I was not intending to disparage your OP, and agree it was written with respect for both sides of this issue. My post was a simple attempt to explain the how and why to those who viewed the HERDER SPRING decision as unfair.</p> David good and helpful post.…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2014-11-20:2274639:Comment:6418452014-11-20T21:15:40.724ZFrank Walkerhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/FrankWalker
<p>David good and helpful post. For the record, my OP was never intended to advocate on one side of this issue or the other. I was merely trying to raise awareness. I also acknowledged in the OP that this thing is far from being "new". As I said earlier, I had <strong>(wrongly)</strong> stopped following title washing a couple years ago because I thought it had "gone away" as an issue for PA landowners.</p>
<p>Your post is valuable because it highlights for all PA landowners the magnitude…</p>
<p>David good and helpful post. For the record, my OP was never intended to advocate on one side of this issue or the other. I was merely trying to raise awareness. I also acknowledged in the OP that this thing is far from being "new". As I said earlier, I had <strong>(wrongly)</strong> stopped following title washing a couple years ago because I thought it had "gone away" as an issue for PA landowners.</p>
<p>Your post is valuable because it highlights for all PA landowners the magnitude and seriousness of this controversy. Opinions on both sides are strongly and tightly held. The amount of money on the line is potentially very, very large. And for landowners without a good lease, the specter of clawback looms.</p>