I don't pretend to know everything about everything. My real expertise is in oil and gas leases.
So this was a case you were involved in? I can't really argue with that. I'll have to really grill Antero the next time I talk with them about a partition suit.
The latest between me an ARC: On a Friday I received notice that ARC has me in court and there is a scheduled hearing coming up. The next day I FINALLY received a reply from the lawyer representing ARC.
No mention as to why I have not received answers to the questions I have asked of him in letters and, finally, an e mail.
In fact he included the very questions I had asked in his response, and then asked me what questions I had. Oh, I forgot, his secretary and law clerks read my letters, not him.
He tells me that ARC is willing to negotiate the terms of the lease, but it very easy to read into his letter that it would only be in favor of ARC.
No comment on why I had not heard from the ARC person he told me to contact before a certain date. Three phone calls to the given number in February, one in March, no response.
And of course what he did NOT comment on was the fact the contract indicates the Lessor is (my name) "heir to" (name), aka (name). I am NOT an "heir" to the person named. That person has been married, or enjoyed "sleeping arrangements" with several other women. He has a daughter from the first marriage that was married three times with a count of five sons. His oldest son, this I know is fact, has two daughters and a son through various marriages/sleeping arrangements. Looks like ARC's employees gave up on tracking down these true "heirs" and put my name on the document.
I am going to notify the court that because of the incorrect name on the contract I am not obligated to ARC. This should be interesting! rcr 4/8/2017
If you are certain you are not the heir? Just to show them my appreciation I would wait to tell them until the last moment. Nor would I give them any information beyond that I am not heir to said person, that they had offspring. Give them a nice Perry Mason moment. I would wait even past that point but I wouldn't want to foul the rightful owners title or give them a bigger knot to untangle.
You need to look at this from a slightly angle. Most of the problems with the Doddridge contract had been tied up before the lawyer working on the Ritchie property first contacted me. That lawyer has been making mistake after mistake, The contract mentioned the Lessor was a person with a different description then mine. The lawyer had not connected the actual ME to the contract. I was made an offer by the Corp. to purchase the ownership of the land which the contract indicated was not me.
At that point it made no difference how my name became invoked, I had no legal right to the property as that had not been established. Yet they wanted me to sell property I did not own to the corporation.
There was a point in the exchange when I gave thought to telling the lawyer that if I in fact was my uncle's heir and who would receive money for the lease of that property then how much would I received by the same amount of property that I had inherited from my mother?
The final "revised" contract came to me without a file copy. Left a phone message for the lawyer and early the next morning FedEx left another envelope with the file copy, and a "pre payed" return envelope with a Fedex label. The form indicated that Fedex was to charge the SENDER for delivery costs. In other words it was not pre-paid.
Even at that, I do not have a Fedex office near me. So I took one of the pre-paid USPS envelopes I had received from the firm and took it to the post office. I was told the indicated pre pay imprinted upon the label was out of date. I had to pay the postage.
Just what I have mentioned here makes me wonder if the lawyer handling the Ritchie contracts had experience n his line of work. Maybe it was the office help that should be blamed? I have seen several cases locally in which very serious charges against a person whose, name was not spelled in the manner of what was on the court papers, were dropped because according to the court papers it was "someone else" who was supposed to have appeared in court.
I have come to learn this is quite common in the U.S. courts at all lever.
Meanwhile, even though the paperwork was useless in court I still have the corporation stating that I am holding up the process and others were not receiving their "full benefits' of the lease because of me. Not the mistakes of the lawyer representing the corporation. I am the one who pointed out the errors to the lawyer. If I kept my mouth shut I would have received money for property I did not own.
Good old corporate West Virginia. rcr4/28/2017