Okay, I am at a turning point about how to proceed with an issue that has been 20 years in the making. Long short of the issue is that someone has claimed my mineral rights stating that the royalty interest left to me in a probated will only pertained to active wells at time of death and that the mineral interest were left to the spouse as the will did not directly address mineral rights. I discovered this due to finding funds in the unclaimed funds list with the state. The oil company has suspended payment on the wells until I or the surviving spouse provide proof of ownership. My attorney has advised me my only course of action is to sue the surviving spouse who has been living off of ill gotten gains that were mine and through research I can safely guess does not have 2 pennies to rub together. I do not understand this thinking as the will clearly states I inherit the royalty interest. There is no mention of royalty interest or mineral rights being inherited by the spouse. Wouldn't the logical way to go is to write the oil company advising them they are wrong and prove it with the will? (Yes they have copies of several generations of the will showing the inheritance and who inherited it.) Obviously I don't have $$$$ to give an attorney, so I may have to be happy to have at least stopped future payments but when does the wronged person ever have a fighting chance? Any suggestions or ideas from anyone will be greatly appreciated. Thank - AL
Your problem is best addressed by the courts. If a person is lucky, the worth of what is being contested will pay for the legal costs. Sometimes, the property is not worth the cost to regain. And sometimes what people thought the law was, was not what it was.
Sometimes you do need to hire a professional in the particular expertise, in this situation, the law, to analyze the problem and what is required to provide remedy.
Your question was answered on July 1, 2014. I guess you figure if you keep posting it, someone will give the answer that you want to hear. Best of luck.
A royalty interest in a drilling unit of a producing well is not the same thing as mineral rights acreage. Had the wording of the will read oil gas and mineral rights including royalty interests, you would have a case. Whether or not it was intended, the wording of the will does not state that your inherit mineral acreage other than the specific royalty interest producing acreage with in the well unit. Therefor if other remaining real estate or real property was awarded to the ex spouse, that is the owner of the mineral rights. It was your ancestors mistake,
I don't think that is what you wanted to hear. Take it with a grain of salt. The attorney seemed to indicate that you had a case. Maybe he actually read the will. No one on this forum has.
Very true opinions can only be rendered based on what you are indicating. I have had to run title many times with various wills, trusts etc. But you attorney either feels you have a case or just wants to litigate
That is not the case. I am attempting to arm myself with enough knowledge to keep attorney fees down. I am asking about the wording of the will. There is no mention of mineral rights at all in the will. It states it leaves all royalty rights to me. This is the only wording pertaining to the subject. So an attorney has said that because mineral rights are not specifically stated, it falls in the part of the will that all items not specifically mentioned are left to the spouse. So before I invest $$$, I am trying to see if this has happened to anyone else and if so, can their position stand in a court. I guess no one is understanding my question, and I am not meaning to offend anyone but cost is an issue, so before hiring an attorney that could end up being very costly, I want to see if this is worth fighting for or not. I apologize for wasting your time. Thank you for responding.
Dave Quincy said:
Your question was answered on July 1, 2014. I guess you figure if you keep posting it, someone will give the answer that you want to hear. Best of luck.
The will only states royalty intersts. There is no mention of existing wells in the will. Thank you for the clarity. I guess I need to back off and just let the spouse sue me... Thanks AL
Bertram Sippy said:
A royalty interest in a drilling unit of a producing well is not the same thing as mineral rights acreage. Had the wording of the will read oil gas and mineral rights including royalty interests, you would have a case. Whether or not it was intended, the wording of the will does not state that your inherit mineral acreage other than the specific royalty interest producing acreage with in the well unit. Therefor if other remaining real estate or real property was awarded to the ex spouse, that is the owner of the mineral rights. It was your ancestors mistake,
Dear Al,
You will never know what the giver meant to do. Perhaps the ancestor wanted you to share perhaps not. Right now you are both getting 100% of nothing and have no chance of getting anything without great cost which may not be worth the effort.
I suggest you each acknowledge that your are in disagreement with the wording of the will and desire to clarify the intent. Then agree to quit claim 50% of all MINERAL RIGHTS in dispute to the the other party with the added agreement to construct a put and call arrangement after a time period or when either may pass if sooner. With that each party gets half of something and the right to own the entire mineral right in the future.
The legal cost of the deeds and agreement can come out of the money in suspense. That is more productive than letting the producer and the courts have the whole pie.
Thank you. I was attempting to see if anyone had prior experience with something like this so I could make a correct decision about the direction I should take. And to see if the attorney does know what he is doing. LOL. AL
Lynn Wood said:
Your problem is best addressed by the courts. If a person is lucky, the worth of what is being contested will pay for the legal costs. Sometimes, the property is not worth the cost to regain. And sometimes what people thought the law was, was not what it was.
Sometimes you do need to hire a professional in the particular expertise, in this situation, the law, to analyze the problem and what is required to provide remedy.
Good advise. However, going by the history of the spouse, unfortunately, I doubt if she would agree. I believe I will just back up, sit and wait. If she believes she is in the right, and this claim was done honestly, she will sue me if she has the monies. I will let you know as I definitely wouldn't want others to go through something like this. Thanks AL
Gary L. Hutchinson said:
Dear Al,
You will never know what the giver meant to do. Perhaps the ancestor wanted you to share perhaps not. Right now you are both getting 100% of nothing and have no chance of getting anything without great cost which may not be worth the effort.
I suggest you each acknowledge that your are in disagreement with the wording of the will and desire to clarify the intent. Then agree to quit claim 50% of all MINERAL RIGHTS in dispute to the the other party with the added agreement to construct a put and call arrangement after a time period or when either may pass if sooner. With that each party gets half of something and the right to own the entire mineral right in the future.
The legal cost of the deeds and agreement can come out of the money in suspense. That is more productive than letting the producer and the courts have the whole pie. (Unless it is mincemeat)
Gary L Hutchinson
Minerals Management
Gary's plan seems to be a good one and will expedite the process. A royalty interest is only ownership in a producing well- royalty percentage agreed in a lease x amount of acreage owned in a drilling unit to a certain producing depth. Mineral rights are the net acres owned overall in an area leased, unleased etc.
The other party will never agree to that if she believes that she owns all of the minerals. It more often than not comes down to perception, and not reality. She may own them though. I would need to read the actual will.
You don't always need money to use the services of an attorney. Cases are often accepted on a contingency basis, with no money up front.
Offer the lawyer a piece of the pie if they help straighten out the royalty/mineral issue under the terms of the will, and convince the oil company to take it out of suspense.
Al, If she has the money to sue, it may be better spent buying you out when you place a put at your price or taking your offer.. She wins either way and doesn't run the risk of losing 100% before a judge. The lemonade will taste good. GLH
Al Freeman said:
Good advise. However, going by the history of the spouse, unfortunately, I doubt if she would agree. I believe I will just back up, sit and wait. If she believes she is in the right, and this claim was done honestly, she will sue me if she has the monies. I will let you know as I definitely wouldn't want others to go through something like this. Thanks AL
Gary L. Hutchinson said:Dear Al,
You will never know what the giver meant to do. Perhaps the ancestor wanted you to share perhaps not. Right now you are both getting 100% of nothing and have no chance of getting anything without great cost which may not be worth the effort.
I suggest you each acknowledge that your are in disagreement with the wording of the will and desire to clarify the intent. Then agree to quit claim 50% of all MINERAL RIGHTS in dispute to the the other party with the added agreement to construct a put and call arrangement after a time period or when either may pass if sooner. With that each party gets half of something and the right to own the entire mineral right in the future.
The legal cost of the deeds and agreement can come out of the money in suspense. That is more productive than letting the producer and the courts have the whole pie. (Unless it is mincemeat)
Al, what you should be looking for in the Will is if it has a residuary clause. Something along the lines of "I will, devise, bequeath and give all the rest and remainder of my property and estate of every kind and character, including, but not limited to, real and personal property in which I may have an interest at the date of my death and which is not otherwise effectively disposed of, to ..."
If nothing of that nature exists in your will, and the will says you get all royalties, what does it specify the spouse was to receive?
I am posting a couple of lines from the will: I bequeath the following property to my son "my seperate property consisting of ... my intested in 100 acreas of land more or lesss with royalties..." further on " oil royalty interest left to me by my mother..." This covers the two seperate items pertaining to mineral oil rights.
Then "I give, devise and bequeath and and all of my remaining property of whatever nature not expressly heretofore delineated ...to my wife..." My question as this is my father's seperate property, how can the spouse claim it with the last clause quoted? It me this is a simple fact that he was leaving me his seperate property that was not part of the marital estate, and I don't see how the oil company could be confused by this as it specifically states "seperate property". I may have blinders on and am unable to see pass my nose. This is why I am asking for advise before having to pay a bunch of $$ that I don't think should be spent. Thanks Al
Kitchen said:
Al, what you should be looking for in the Will is if it has a residuary clause. Something along the lines of "I will, devise, bequeath and give all the rest and remainder of my property and estate of every kind and character, including, but not limited to, real and personal property in which I may have an interest at the date of my death and which is not otherwise effectively disposed of, to ..."
If nothing of that nature exists in your will, and the will says you get all royalties, what does it specify the spouse was to receive?
Al, get to a lawyer. I don't even think you have an oil and gas matter but you actually need a good probate attorney. The former spouse may have found a lawyer who would work on contingency to throw a monkey wrench into the works and see if anything can be shaken loose.
What is at question here is what you received in the will and a probate attorney will be the one to figure that out.
I never have figured out why one would have to sue someone other than the operator for royalty paid to the wrong person. If the operator paid the wrong person, that person defrauded the operator and it should have nothing to do with the royalty the operator owes you. The wrongful party did not steal it from you. If the division order has language on it that the one who signs and returns the division order is responsible for repaying overpayments or erroneous payments, that's where the operator should recover their mispayments.
Evidently I have rubbed you the wrong way. My apology for not spell checking. Thank you for pointing out that error. I have admitted and still admit that I have no knowledge of my subject matter and had hoped I could obtain some good advise and knowledge before moving forward. I was told to come to this site as it would help me. I am a hard-headed SOB and obviously am not missing something I never had. Howver, I do believe in justice and the American way. When some breaks into your home and steals from you, wouldn't you want that person to be caught? This is no different. I am sorry I wasted your time. I kept coming back as my original question was never addressed until last night. That is probably my fault as I never included the wording in the will in my questions. The ... pertained to other items not royalty related. There are two separate royalty interests which I listed. I do thank you for your time and trouble. Al
Dave Quincy said:
No one can really advise you because they haven't read the will. See advice dated July 1, 2014. What is the remaining property that was conveyed under the residuary clause? Whatever it is, the widow appears to own both surface and minerals, and would be stupid to convey you a 50% QCD. Maybe there isn't any additional real property.
If the royalty suspended is on the 100 acres in the first paragraph, then I don't see why it would have been suspended? Even though you abbreviate with ..., it does appear that you are the clear beneficiary.
You can come back on, and throw out some more bones. Maybe someone will finally be able to figure it out. Go ahead and spell seperate as separate, so you don't confuse young people using this site as a learning tool.
Mr. Kennedy - Thank you so much. The light bulb turned on when I read your answer. This was my confusion dealing with the oil company as I believed I have provided the proof that I am the legal heir. I believe that the oil company's landman did not research the claim properly before awarding the rights to the spouse. I provided paperwork showing the rights probated to me. I felt the oil company was wanting me to get a quick claim deed as that would show that the spouse did own the rights, and they would not have to pay me the royalties paid to the wrong person (and thus go after that person). However, believing this to be the case and proving it are two different things. This is why I was asking for advise on this site in case anyone else had this happen to them and could advise me how to proceed. Either way, I will need to spend $$$ for an attorney as evidently I am hitting a brick wall dealing with the oil company. I just thought that as I had the paperwork and proven my claim, why do I have to go through all of this? Thank you for your thoughts. Al
r w kennedy said:
Al, get to a lawyer. I don't even think you have an oil and gas matter but you actually need a good probate attorney. The former spouse may have found a lawyer who would work on contingency to throw a monkey wrench into the works and see if anything can be shaken loose.
What is at question here is what you received in the will and a probate attorney will be the one to figure that out.
I never have figured out why one would have to sue someone other than the operator for royalty paid to the wrong person. If the operator paid the wrong person, that person defrauded the operator and it should have nothing to do with the royalty the operator owes you. The wrongful party did not steal it from you. If the division order has language on it that the one who signs and returns the division order is responsible for repaying overpayments or erroneous payments, that's where the operator should recover their mispayments.
"my intested in 100 acreas of land" I'm assuming this is written in will as 'interest' ;
if so, it 'might' have bequested all interest to you, but we can never know without the full wording of will paragraph - the bits and pieces presented don't count (in a court either).