Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Taken By Bill Piper 11/10/2009
Wells Permitted and Completed
Rustic South Texas Adventure
SAVE THE DATE: Oct 15 -18, 2015
WHERE SOUTH TEXAS SYNDICATE STARTED : Click to order a copy
Discussions on South Texas Syndicate (STS) with benificaries of the trust.
STS new Trustee
Beneficiaries visit Cotulla
South Texas Syndicate Rig
Taken By Bill Piper 11/10/2009
Map of the Eagle Ford Shale
Wells Permitted and Completed
Going to South Texas
Rustic South Texas Adventure
2015 Annual Meeting
SAVE THE DATE: Oct 15 -18, 2015
The Remarkable Men of Garden City
WHERE SOUTH TEXAS SYNDICATE STARTED : Click to order a copy
The Settlement Agreement with JPM said all agreements were included in the agreement. The motion to pay Yetterberg fees was not part of the agreement (it came in after everything was agreed to). The concern was that any motion approved at that time would be an amendment to that agreement and would require it to be re-negotiated. Assuming that everybody agreed and it went forward it would require everybody signing the agreement again. This would either cause a big delay, or we would not be able to collect all the signatures again, thereby putting the settlement at risk of not happening. The motion for fees was denied without prejudice, meaning that it can be filed again.
ReplyDeletePlease explain why you are objecting. These people paid with their own money to remove JPM. The court agreed as well as over 98% of the beneficiaries. Your objection will significantly delay our payment from the settlement. There is no reason to involve the courts and additional expenses. These people provided a very valuable service to the Trust going forward and should be paid back. I am very unhappy with your actions and do not want you involved with STS as it relates to the future of my family. I hope that others agree.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThey did not pay Yetterberg to remove JPM, that was almost done before they hired him. Jack Meyer paid out of his pocket to start that. Yrtterberg was a $500,000+ expense to help select a new Trustee by a small group that refused input from other beneficiaries. This will not delay any payment unless Warner, Piper, et al choose to delay it. Do not criticize actions that you don't understand.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJohn Meyer Jr. has asked me to not criticize his dad due to my lack of understanding. Might I reply as a Texan - BULL*** ( I was born in Texas )
ReplyDelete1) For his information, I was involved from the very beginning. I was very uncomfortable with Meyer representing me against JPM. As a result, I was responsible for finding the lawyer who initially put together the suit to remove JPM and file the suit for damages. At my expense I was involved with the vetting of replacement lawyers and trustees. In addition I reviewed the recommendations of the independent CFA. If he had been with the group, he would I have known that I did not always agree.
2) As to a small group, it involved members of the 5 families, myself and the two Bank trustees. He has no idea as to the number of e mails and phone calls that were placed to keep beneficiaries informed. With over 95% approval, they must have felt informed.
3) There will definitely be a delay. Bank of Texas will not move forward until the court settles his objection. As I stated earlier ,it was my opinion that JPM was about to sell STS. We should be grateful that this group stepped forward. Why would they not want to be paid back as soon as possible. You should be honest and say that he does not want this group to be paid at all.
We were all aware from the beginning as to your dad's desire to be involved. In fact, the group and lawyers thought that he should be involved. His subsequent actions indicate that he had another agenda.
I look forward to meeting you and discussing my lack of understanding. Until then I await your apology.
Dave: (I assume Dave Pierson) Thank you for your spirited response. If you were responsible for finding the lawyer who initially put together the suit to remove JPM, I applaud you. However
ReplyDelete1) The selection of John Massopust was one of the bigger problems we had to overcome. His selection of the damage model that was used certainly cost us all lots of money. He chose to "swing for the fences" and we all ultimately "got hit by the pitch" because his damage model was not provable.
2) The original suit (by Jack Meyer) was filed 7/10/2010 and joined by Blaze shortly thereafter. The first mention of the Zelle Hoffman firm was as an observer at a hearing on 11/8/11. The Palintiff-Intervenors did not finally join the suit until Jan. 2012. Some 18 months later.
3) You are correct that there will be a delay because the Yetterberg firm just filed a Motion regarding the Settlement that is scheduled to be heard on Feb. 20. instead of waiting until after the Settlement was final.
Now that some of your "facts" have been corrected I hope we can end this "pissing match" and work for the common good.