On our 'standard lease, done fraudulently, a notation at bottom says, ‘C91-Victory-8-22’ so what could it mean?
Our mother formed a Utah Trust on 6/30/1998 that owned all these Williams County, North Dakota minerals.
Legal description for leasing purposes on 1177.04 gross acres is:
In Section 6 Lot 8-154-101, 57.04 acres, [5.432381 mineral acres] - 0.095238 %
In Sections 29, 32, 33-155-101, probated [1959] 737.04 acres, [54.01 mineral acres, after 25% to buyer in 1971] - 0.071450% share
In Sections 32, 33-155-101, owned outside of 1959 probate, 440 acres [reserved 330 mineral acres] - 75% share
On 6/6/2003, our mother formed a ‘trust/will’ to convey her house to our brother.
She had previously quitclaimed the house to him, but the lawyer was willing to take her money.
Subsequent to lease to Cody Oil and Gas, Statoil has 6 producing wells on the tracts leased illegally from the 1998 Trust.
Well 20214 under the 57.04 acres with a 0.095238% share, 5.432381 net mineral acres.
Well 21005 under Section 33 into 28, Well 21709 from Section 33 into 28, Well 21562 from 33 into 28, Well 22056 from 29 into 32, Well 22057 from 29 into 32, total 1177.04 gross acres, 384.01 net mineral acres.
Statoil assumed that the 1998 Trust that leased the minerals was superseded by the 2003 ‘trust/will’ when formed on 6/6/03, solely to convey our mother’s house previously quitclaimed to our brother, by 7/11/2006 warranty deed he never sought.
The 2003 ‘trust/will’ was empty since 7/11/06 when the house our brother had already owned by quitclaim deed was again conveyed to him by a warranty deed he never asked for.
As a condition of issuing a division order, Statoil lawyer demanded insertion of minerals into the ‘will’ for probate and transfer of minerals to the 2003 Trust.
-
As first named Successor in the 1998 Trust, subsequent to my objection to this ploy, Judge Rustad at Williston ruled on 1/3/2013 that the 6/6/03 ‘trust/will’ had revoked the 6/30/98 Trust.
-
This ruling affirmed that the 1998 Trust became invalid on 6/6/03, when the 2003 ‘trust/will’ was formed, although it was devoid of any property after it conveyed the house to our brother on 7/11/06.
-
This ruling declared that the 2009 lease illegally expedited by the heir named 4th in line as 1998 Successor Trustee was invalid, no matter who had done it.
Cody Oil Landman Luke Montieth had convinced this heir to sign the 2009 lease as a 1998 Successor Trustee, while overseas in Laos, and to return it without being notarized. He neglected to locate a copy of the 1998 Trust.
- The result of this court ruling is that the minerals are now owned by the 2003 Trust, and heirs formerly named in the 1998 Trust are now free to lease to the highest bidder, by action of the personal representative named in the 2003 ‘will’, who, as Trustee as well, has recorded a 2013 mineral deed and Statement of Claim of Mineral Interest in Williams County, North Dakota.
The same heir who is personal representative in the 2003 ‘will’ is also the 2003 Trustee, bound at Article V, page 12, to act as empowered under the law.
75-7-814. Specific powers of trustee. Title 75 Chapter 7 Section 814:
(1) Without limiting the authority conferred by Section 75-7-813, a trustee may: (i) enter into a lease for any purpose as lessor or lessee, including a lease or other arrangement for exploration and removal of natural resources, with or without the option to purchase or renew, for a period within or extending beyond the duration of the trust.
Through the 2003 Trustee, trust members must now legally offer the same minerals that were illegally leased in 2009 to the highest bidder, because there is no legal proof that it was ever a valid lease.
-
Lessee Cody Oil shall be given the first option to lease anew the tracts at a mutually agreed upon royalty share, by matching the highest bid received per mineral acre, discounting from that total the $200 per mineral acre fraudulently paid to the 1998 Trust in 2009 when the lease was invalid, and when 2 of the 5 Wagenman heirs did not return the ratification to Cody Oil for recording in Williams County.
-
Complicating matters is the fact that Statoil has 6 producing wells on the tracts leased by the 1998 Trust that was ruled invalid on 1/3/13, and lessee Cody Oil has a share in each well, as do other partners MBI Oil, Stewart Geological, and Prolific Petroleum.
The following may pertain to Wagenman minerals under tracts the 1998 Trust supposedly did not own, as the Trust has now been deemed invalid from the date when the Utah 6/6/2003 ‘legal event’ was expedited, according to the ruling by Judge Rustad, effective on 1/3/13 -
I have the document, DESIGNATION OF POOLED UNIT no. 725308 by Brigham Inc, General Partner to BRIGHAM OIL AND GAS, L.P., showing an attempt to cover all bases for what appears to be the listed unleased tracts they horizontaled beneath, with the notation at bottom,
‘L:\Land\Resource Plays\WillistonND\Project-RRDR\Wells\BOG WAGENMAN 29-32 #1H (155N-101 W-29 155 N-101 W-32)\Pooling\WAGENMAN 29-32#1HDesigofPooledU(12-14-2011).doc’
For requirements for imposition of a risk penalty, see NDCC Section 380-08-08 and NDAC Section 43-02-03-16.3, ‘unleased mineral owners may be required to pay a risk penalty of 50% of their share of the reasonable actual cost of drilling and completing the well’.
Choices left to Statoil, Cody Oil and partners are:
Plan A - Finally reveal the facts regarding Statoil push for probate and transfer of minerals away from the 1998 Trust, and whether there was an uncorrectible flaw barring the Successor Trustee from correcting it and fulfilling the authority granted, and,
(1) If feasible, ask the Judge to rescind his order that invalidated the 1998 Trust, so that it continues doing the task it did for 15 and a half years.
Plan B - Cooperate with heirs unwittingly involved in the 2009 lease that never was, according to the ruling on 1/3/13, wherein the sale of lease on the producing 387.04 mineral acres to the highest bidder shall go forward to benefit all concerned parties, to be,
(2) Of especial benefit to Cody Oil and partners, who may not wish another entity to lease the minerals.
Plan C - Allow the minerals to remain unleased and ‘unit pool’ them at a mutually agreed upon royalty share to every heir individually, in the event that there is not a valid lease offered by a winning lessee, and accepted by the 2003 Trust.