My apologies. I had an appointment this morning and should not have posted until I had more time to respond. Yes, my mother passed away in 2009 and I am 1/4 owner of the mineral rights that she had, providing our trustee (my sister) actually does anything or is doing something as she has stated a few months ago. Long story short is that she has been very slow about doing anything. I have hired a probate attorney to deal with that part of the trust issues but I have no idea how to get any information as my sister refuses to share even the most minute information with the rest of the siblings. I have been waiting until after the holidays to pursue anything further in hopes that she would do her fiduciary responsibilities. She also has an attorney so it is costing me personally and through my inheritance so it’s pretty much I’m damned if I do and damned if I don’t. Petra, you are right, I am not on the paperwork as of yet, but I have an interest in it and I am deeply concerned about the handling of the transfer. I do have the original paperwork (minus the original lease) that my mom did in 1981. We are also supposed to have mineral rights in Montana but when I called the Wibaux County Recorder they said our name was not on the property record. I probably don’t understand this well enough to explain it properly, and I am not looking for legal advice, just hoped that someone could tell me if I should hire an oil/gas attorney to look in to this matter. Sorry this is so long and sorry if I caused any confusion.
Township 141 North, Range 105 West…Section 19, Section 30
You need your name on a deed before u can ask for information… chances are you wont get a cut of the current lease bonus… you need your name on a deed… mine took almost a year I think… get your ducks lined up and try to find out if your siblings get even amounts of land… and find out if you will be getting a cut of any well made under the current lease… once you have your name on the deed…
I would feel violated if my kids were trying to find out my lease info… if I don’t want to tell them that should be that… I wouldn’t want them playing detective I would also feel violated if my family was trying to faze me out That’s why I keep saying … is your name on the deed…
I did some backtracking. Ms. Adkisson states that her mother passed away in 2009 in a post elsewhere.
My mother named my sister to be the trustee which I knew well before my mother passed. She also named my other sister & brother to act as trustee(s) if my oldest sister could/would not act. I am at the bottom of the totem pole which was perfectly fine with me.
The legal description is Twnshp 141N, Range 105 West, Section 19 Lots 3&4 and Section 30 Lots 2,3&4, containing 609.8 acres. I got the 609 acres from the lease. My cousins have done their transfer from when my aunt died and they are listed on the ESER(?) website in the same area.
I am at a crossroads with this whole situation. My attorney wants me to go forward with court action against my sister and have her removed but every time I turn around it costs me a bunch of money and then her attorney is draining the trust account so I have to weigh the possibility of losing more money not only for myself but for my other 2 siblings. The other factor is I hate the thought of having to take my sister to court but I also hate the fact that she is doing this to her siblings.
Ms. Adkisson, was your sister named as the representative in the will or did you all have to approve her ? As I said, if you approved her you can revoke her, and choose another among you. If this is the case I would act immediately.
First of all is it 600 acres total or 600 mineral acres big difference ! 600 MINERAL acres is alot of minerals rarely does one person hold that many mineral acres . We had a transfer Quick Claim Deed done in Beach it took 10 days and $16.00.
GET A LAWYER !! Check to see it your mother had a power of attorney.
If you mother is living she can get all the information for you. If possible take her to the lawyer with you to get it straighten out before she passes. So her wishes what ever they maybe are fulfilled.
Zeb:
Good information in your post. Things like this do occur and unless the lease specifies all these little details, the mineral owner sometimes pays the price. This is the very reason that I want my leases to expire so I may negotiate a new lease. It was back in 2008 and 2009 that my current leases were negotiated and there has been alot learned about leasing since that time. I’m sure alot of us are in the same boat.
The North Dakota Supreme Court, following Texas case law, and rejecting Oklahoma and Kansas law, has ruled that a company may deduct all post-wellhead costs when calculating royalty under typical company-drafted royalty clauses (see Bice v. Petro-Hunt, L.L.C., 2009 ND 124, 768 N.W.2d 496). This decision will inevitably result in companies sharpening their pencils when calculating royalty payments to maximize their deductions. Unfortunately, mineral owners who have already executed company lease forms will have little recourse to prevent companies from taking maximum advantage of this deduction right. For mineral owners that have not yet leased, it is now imperative that they negotiate more favorable royalty provisions. To avoid this and related royalty valuation problems, mineral owners should insist upon the following royalty terms:
-
Royalty should be due on a stated fraction or percentage of “gross proceeds but not less than gross market value at an established market location.” By requiring royalty to be paid on “gross proceeds” of an actual sale with the floor being “gross market value,” the mineral owner should be protected from “sweetheart” sales at a low price to an affiliated company; further protection from this possibility would be obtained by providing for royalty on the “gross proceeds received from the first arm’s-length sale of oil or gas but not less than gross market value.”
-
Any reference that royalty is payable or calculated “at the well,” “at the wellhead,” at the “mouth of the well,” or at any other location, other than the actual point of sale, should be deleted.
-
If any costs, other than the mineral owner’s share of state production taxes, are to be deducted (this deduction is expressly permitted by statute), they should be expressly identified in detail, including how such deduction is to be calculated. In general, mineral owners should resist such language, except perhaps the deduction of actual transportation charges levied by a “common carrier” pipeline. Because gas may be “processed” for the removal of natural gasoline and other valuable liquids, a company may bargain hard for the right to deduct processing costs. If a mineral owner agrees to the deduction of such costs, it should not include treating or dehydration costs and related compression costs and should only permit the deduction of actual and direct costs of deducting the cost of extracting natural gasoline and other valuable liquids and such deductions should only be made from the sale price of such gasoline and liquids and not from the sale price of the “residue” gas.
Charles:
Yes, and so good for you that three year lease terms appear to be becoming more the “norm”!
well age has nothing to do with maturity as you are 60 years old and coming on a free board for free information you should be expecting any kind of reply… lets not even get ahead of ourselves here as your post lacked information and lead a whole forum on a goose chase trying to help you, your writing left a forum to speculation.
Joel, I have heard more than once that the tax dollars go to the most populous areas (back east). Also the tax surplus will not go to things like keeping up the roads needed to assure that the oil, and taxes from the oil keep flowing. The tax surplus will likely be spent on a tax reduction for everyone in the state. I am sure the 10% of the population that lives in the western part of the state will appreciate the tax cut, but the larger number of VOTERS in the eastern part of the state will appreciate it more.
Zeb, I agree that the state should invest some of the surplus in infrastructure to assure that the returns for the oil patch are larger and greater for decades to come. I think those who are elected are generally short sighted. I think they would eat their seedstock in the winter and have nothing to plant in the spring. There will be development, I can’t see anything that will stop it now. It’s an eviable position, to be able to do nothing and know it won’t fail. I wonder if they can’t imagine how it would be even better with a little help. After hearing about counties threatening to close roads to the oil companies trucks last spring if they didn’t help with the upkeep, when there is a large surplus of money from oil tax revenues sitting in Bismarck. It seems the state is determined to spend the money on anything but what made the money for them in the first place. Short sighted and sad.
On checks I have received for a well, they give the amount of tax on a month by month basis and a year to date at the bottom.
Thank you Joel for confirming the way I “thought” it should go. I’m told a check for some of my KOG wells will go out this month. I’m thinking probably about Dec.31 around midnight, which would be fantastic with me as I wasn’t expecting a check until March. The thought of checks I can actually cash brings a smile to my face. I will probably be in the red still due to legal expenses. It’s funny that from personal experience if you lease they do not pay you or pay late…but if you do not lease they pay promptly. It might be because there are so many why’s and wherefores in a lease and all the court cases that cover lease law, but if you are legally pooled with a well and have no lease, there may not be as much leeway. You can’t bend language where there is no language.
My own feeling is that any area specific appropriations from the state severance royalty funds should go to support industry infrastructure and housing in the development area itself and in turn secure more opportunity for continued development.
Joel, I forgot to mention that the checks automatically go stale and the company voids them if not cashed, in my case 90 days. If we ever finally work things out (I say if because I found out today that my lawyer granted them yet another extention without informing me, does he really want to be fired ?) I will give them my soc sec #, or rather the accountant my brother and I hire will give it to them I suspect. I don’t know if I will have to take all of 5 years production as income in one year. It wouldn’t seem right, but if I have to pay more in taxes, I will just deal with it and move on, after everything is in it’s correct order, which is all i expect.
RW… while I think that sadly you are right for the most part regarding the state benefiting the most as a whole, but to Joel… I also recall seeing at one time, that in GV when anyone produces more than 70% of the total annual county oil use that entity is taxed as a “utility”. I am hoping that you can uncover this as myth, sadly tho u might find it true, and if true would certainly help to buy a plow or two I would think…
Joel, sadly altough my oil has been pumped for going on 5 years this is the first year anyone has tried to pay me for any of it. I can’t even cash the checks because practically all my McKenzie county holdings are tied up in litigation over fraud and slander of title. I am supposed to receive checks on my new wells soon, and maybe I can answer your questions then, if no one has already done so. Btw, since I can’t cash the checks anyway, I did not give my soc sec #. SM Energy’s reply to that was they would withhold 28% federal income tax. To which I replied, what difference would it make to me whether I not cash a check for $250 or not cash a check for $200 ?
Joel, I think in virtually all cases the operator takes over the duty to pay the lessor. That is not to say that you wouldn’t be suing your original lessee should royalty not be paid… Thank you Joel, for the info about the few checks that may not have gone stale at the end of the year. I have asked SM Energy to not send them until things are settled because of security reasons. SM Energy has actually posted one royalty check without postage, I am amazed it finally got to me two weeks late, much battered, even though the post office stamped it return to sender, needs postage. I scanned it and e-mailed SM Energy and my lawyers saying I am not responsible for any checks that may be lost and subsequently cashed, especially if they are going to send them without postage. They meter postage so it’s not a case of the stamp falling off.