Mineral owner non expiring contract with lawyer for 40 percent cut

Met a gentlemen today who inherited minerals.

Mentioned an uncle somehow defrauded he and sister. Gentlemen and sis hired Houston attys. Houston attys had bro and sis sign a contract whereby attys would receive 40 percent with no term, in other words no expiration date. Any ideas? This is outlandish. I have not read contract as yet but my understanding is attys receive 40 percent of income in perpetuity. The gentlemen said he didn't understand what he was signing. Isn't this sick? Thanks for any input.

1. Its a free country. He didn't have to sign the agreement.

2. In exchange, the Houston attorneys will have to sue the uncle to return the minerals. Depending on the facts, it may not be easy, and they may not prevail.

Really depends on the circumstances. If a small number of minerals acres and a tough case, it may be too low. Keep in mind the attorney is likely to invest at least $100,000 of his time, and maybe a good amount of expenses, to take even a simpler commercial case to trial.

This User has been warned about the following comment, and directed to remove it. Forum Administrator

I think it is fairly common for attorneys to take on clients for a cut of the proceeds in lieu of billing for their time (this is especially the case in personal injury cases). Depending on the contract signed, I would be very surprised if the individual couldn't fire the lawyer--I'd reach out to the state bar and ask about the legality of a contract whereby they lawyer could simply work this deal at his or her leisure for an undetermined amount of time.

Dear Mr. Broyles,

Everybody is entitled to an opinion. However, your profanity has no place in this forum. Apparently, you have never hired an attorney on contingency before. As Mr. Caldwell said, it could be too low, if the case goes to appeals.

I am not the forum police department, but your language is offensive to many, including me.

Best

Buddy Cotten

Mr. Dowd, Mr. Caldwell, and Mr. Cotten are correct. If I were the royalty owner I would look at the willingness for the attorney to take this on as a percentage as a good thing. The attorney is obviously confident enough that they will prevail in getting the brother and sister what is due to them. Another attorney who may not be successful could take on a case like this with retainer and continually bill the brother and sister for years until an uncertain outcome. A really good attorney will be ready to bring in outside counsel and experts to assist him in recovering the mineral interests. The attorney might end up spending more money than the initial reward and could end up at a loss for many years. Another thing to look at is what if the uncle has been receiving royalties for many years and has spent all of the money. If he does not have any way to pay up the past royalties and has no real assets it would take considerably longer for the attorney to recoup his costs.

We do not know the specifics of the issue either. Small mineral interests, production time, future wells, brother and sister's finances, or any other factors. They have a chance to get 60% of what they believe has been stolen from them or 0% if they do not proceed with hiring an attorney.

This is not constructive in any way. Please stay out of the conversations with that type of language.

That seems to be a pretty high estimation of the Lawyers commitment to this case.... that is 500 hrs at $200 an hour.

I would doubt that is a fair estimation of the investment by a lawyer for this case.

This User has been warned about the following comment, and directed to remove it. Forum Administrator

THEN ASK THE SEMI CROOKED ATTY TO SHUT UP TOO! JUST MY OPINION! JUST REALLY RINGS MY BELL WHEN AN ATTY ATTEMPTS TO TAKE SOMEONE TO THE CLEANERS--NOT OPINION, FACT.

FACT: We have worked with Mr. Caldwell. He was not crooked nor semi crooked. FACT: He got us a much better contract with a much higher bonus than we would have gotten otherwise. FACT: His fee was very reasonable.

It just really rings my bell when people spout nonsense.

Apparently Mr. Broyles did not read the Forum Rules, the recent blog post by Elizabeth Alford or the e-mail sent by Kenny DuBose earlier this month. Or he read it and does not care.

Just ignore him, Liz.