I am wondering if anybody on this forum signed with Great Lakes Energy back in 2007, has any info on the renewal clause.  It is very vague it states " similar terms a like lease".  I have been going back and forth with Chesapeake about this.  They sent me a check to renew but I sent it back.  My neighbor is also having the same issue. 

Views: 1279

Replies to This Discussion

Yes we signed with great lakes in 2007. The lease was transferred to Chesapeake unbeknownst to us in the fall of 2011. The transfer was recorded at the court house along with 300 others in Feb. of this year.

I have read and reread the lease many times. In paragraph 19 there is the phrase “similar terms a like lease”. I have spoken to lawyers, and one oil and gas attorney said that it would be difficult to win this in court as it is a contract that you were paid for five years with an extension allowance. But another from West Virginia is representing several cases like this on the argument that similar terms could be argued to mean current market value of lease bonuses. Both the lawyers advised against cashing the extension check.

If we were not litigating with Chesapeake over an unlawful claim to our our lease with Great Lakes, we would have a dispute with them over this. I think it’s worth pursuing, especially if you have sizable property. But Chesapeake has more property then they can drill, so unless you’re in a hot spot don’t expect them to show any face except the one they are currently presenting. By agreeing to your demands they would essentially open up every other Great Lakes lease for the same settlement. That will cost them millions. If you and your neighbors collectively can stand together that might give you the leverage you will need.

I have been talking to a land owner who case is similar. Months prior to the expiration of his lease Chesapeake contacted him to offer $4000 an acre. He was waiting to here back from them when he received in the mail the extension check for $10.00 an acre. He didn’t cash the check, got a Lawyer and filed a Lawsuit back in May. The case is still pending; recently the Judge ordered it back to one more round of arbitration.

Our lease has an attached addendum in which paragraph 16 states the lease cannot be transferred without prior written consent from the landowner. This never happen and the lease with Great Lakes expired in March. Our current position is Chesapeake has no legal claim on our lease as Great Lakes neither requested nor received our prior written consent.  A lease in Ohio is construed as a covenant between the Oil company and the landowner. It allows the oil company to explore for oil as long as they comply to the terms.  The leases we signed in 2007 are very one sided. They give all advantages to the Oil Company. The addendum overrides the lease clauses, if you were astute enough to include one with your lease which not everyone was. One of the few rights we had was the prior written consent clause.  They totally ignored it and when we contacted Chesapeake they essentially said that there was no possible reason why we would not have consented to the transfer and therefore the whole issue was mute.

 

How did this situation turn out for you?  I have the same lease. 

Chesapeake Appalachia wins class action lawsuit

Frankovitch

WHEELING – A federal judge has granted Chesapeake Appalachia’s motion for summary judgment in a lawsuit filed against it by a Hancock County woman.

On Aug. 21, U.S. District Judge Frederick Stamp, of the Northern District of West Virginia, ruled for the company in Vaunie Brown’s class action lawsuit. Brown was challenging the company’s decision to exercise an option in her oil and gas lease that allows the company to use her land for five more years.

Brown’s original agreement was with Great Lakes Energy Partners, which assigned the lease to Chesapeake Appalachia. Because no drilling occurred during the lease’s initial five-year term, the defendant should not be able to renew or extend it, she argued.

“(T)he plaintiff argues that, if the relevant sentence of Paragraph 19 (of the lease agreement) grants the defendant a unilateral right to extend the Lease under the same terms, it violates the rule against perpetuities, as it would give Chesapeake an unfettered ability to extend the lease in perpetuity,” Stamp wrote.

“This argument fails as a matter of West Virginia law. West Virginia courts have consistently found that extension and renewal clauses in leases, barring the inclusion of language ‘so plain as to admit no doubt of the purpose to provide for a perpetual renewal,’ grant the lessee a right to a single renewal or extension.”

Brown’s lawsuit also sought damages for what she said was tortious behavior on the part of Chesapeake Appalachia relating to the lease.

In 2007, Brown entered into the oil and gas lease with Great Lakes Energy Partners. It had a primary term of five years and contained a lease extension provision in Paragraph 19.

The provision stated: “Upon expiration of this lease and within sixty days thereinafter, Lessor grants to Lessee an option to extend or renew under similar terms a like lease.”

In the five years after the agreement was reached, no drilling took place on Brown’s property. Great Lakes assigned the lease to Chesapeake Appalachia, too.

Thirteen days before the lease’s expiration, Chesapeake Appalachia filed a notice of extension and gave Brown a bonus payment of $1,000. Her lawsuit followed in Hancock Circuit Court, and the defendant removed it to federal court.

She sought damages for herself and others similarly situated.

Brown was represented by M. Eric Frankovitch, Michael G. Simon and Kevin M. Pearl of Frankovitch, Anetakis, Colantonio & Simon in Weirton.

From the West Virginia Record: Reach John O’Brien at jobrienwv@gmail.com.

does not one begin to realize...or come sadly to believe...between Great Lakes and Marquette and the majors or larger companies who now moved into the region about five years ago

did this knowingly and with a clear aim to undermine the true value of these lands, across both borders

even if they didn't know fully how exactly all the drilling would eventually work out....they had the geology and the maps and the history of the prior extensive geology reports and mapping

its tragic in many ways for so many

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service