Yes, Dave, you do offer valuable insight about what NOT to necessarily do. Keep it up! However, I do agree with you on this one. A mineral owner usually has an absolute right to develop his minerals, but can't just show up on somebody's property and start poking around. If I were a surface owner and a mineral owner asked permission to access my property, I would refuse unless he had a court order or showed up with some kind of evidence that he was going to start exploration (a signed lease and some seismic trucks, for example).
I hope you have stopped insulting posters by calling their family members non compos mentis when there is no basis to do so. Do you still think that they will incarcerate you if you mistakenly leave off an heir on an heirship affidavit? That lady who was executed in Texas a few weeks ago? Was that her crime? Did she file a bad affidavit?
If you disagree with me on anything, it would just be more affirmation of the integrity of my replies.
A surface owner is entitled to quiet enjoyment of the premises. The case law is well established that the intrusion from oil & gas operations needs to be only that which is necessary to effectuate the operations.
The above suggestions that Mrs. Apodaca contact the ranch foreman for a tour of the premises are ridiculous. They are much more likely to tell her no, and would be well within their legal right.
Pete Wrench said:
Yes, Dave, you do offer valuable insight about what NOT to necessarily do. Keep it up! However, I do agree with you on this one. A mineral owner usually has an absolute right to develop his minerals, but can't just show up on somebody's property and start poking around. If I were a surface owner and a mineral owner asked permission to access my property, I would refuse unless he had a court order or showed up with some kind of evidence that he was going to start exploration (a signed lease and some seismic trucks, for example).
If disagreeing with you would affirm the "integrity" of your replies, then agreeing with you must mean that your replies have NO integrity, right? Hmmm, so I guess I'll just have to AGREE with you then! HA HA HA!
I actually DID and DO agree with you on this issue, Dave, can you not read? Let me quote: "I DO AGREE WITH YOU ON THIS ONE" (second line from my last response). Go ahead and delete your last post now so you won't look stupid.
There are a few places around the country I was leasing where showing up on somebody's property unannounced meant taking your life in your hands, literally. So, no, I don't think she should just drive out there and look at the property, of course she would need permission, which they would have no reason to grant not knowing who she is or whether or not to believe her. Man, you really do have some "issues" that you need to deal with, Dave. Seriously.
How come the broker you were associated with for seven years didn't like you? That's hard to fathom. Offer some proof.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case.
What? That you're an idiot.
No, Karen's grandmother was not non compos mentis.
No, an affiant will not be criminally prosecuted for making an honest mistake on an heirship affidavit.
Sort of against the terms of service. Flaming.
By the way this quote is unedited, I just happened to catch it before you edited your post with the addition of two more lines.
Dave Quincy said:
What? That you're an idiot.
Who? Wrench. You shouldn't talk about him like that. He wrote in the Karen Lynch thread that he was associated with a broker for 7 years who didn't like him. I just asked him to give supporting evidence. Why would that give anyone cause to rest their case? That is nonsense. I found it hard to fathom that anyone wouldn't like him, so I was wanting proof. Ask him to answer the question. Why did that broker disdain him?
By the way, that posting was edited. I just happened to want to add two more lines which would tend to support my assertion. Why do they have an edit option if you can't use it?
Bob, line forms to the right. At some point you have to assume that the message has not sunk in, Bob. I try hard not to judge, but you know what, there are folks everywhere and some are just not nice people. I just never expected to see them here.
I'll bet it was a couple of years ago that I responded to a post a fellow made that I thought was incorrect. He then said that he was a lawyer and he was right. Then he said that it was the law in the western states. i really was looking to further my education and he took it as being rude. i apologize that he took it that way. If he is reading this, he knows who he is and I am sincere about an apology if that is the way that he took it.
Something that I would never forgive is to loosely quote "Maybe Buddy should not take out his personal problems on me" Well, most everybody knows that my wife has pretty much has terminal cancer and now have to go to Houston on Thursday to see if it has gone in her brain. One thing to be flip or an ass about me, but my family? My wife fighting for her life? I might forgive but I will never forget and he should pray that we never meet face to face. I would do what any man would do. "He had it coming would be my defense."
If he would post his real name and phone number, or just call me, we can discuss this like men. But I do not see that happening. A landman would never act the way that he does, using his real name.
He reminds me of a smart landman who has basically poisoned every board that he was on. Bet it is still him. I think that he was kicked off this board some years ago and has been ressurected.
r w kennedy said:
Sort of against the terms of service. Flaming.
By the way this quote is unedited, I just happened to catch it before you edited your post with the addition of two more lines.
Dave Quincy said:What? That you're an idiot.
Wait a minute, Buddy. Are you saying that Dave Quincy himself told you not to take your "personal problems" out on him when you were lamenting your beloved wife's terminal medical condition? That is totally insensitive and absolutely unconscionable, why wasn't he kicked off of this Forum immediately after that?
May God bless you and the woman you obviously love very deeply during this struggle, and I think I speak for (almost) everyone on this Forum when I say that we will be thinking of you on Thursday. Houston has some of the best oncologists in the world, so she surely is getting some superior medical attention. Godspeed.