Osage Shareholders Association

Description | Court docs | Other docs | Dialog

Intervention Denied

As many people are already aware the motion to intervene in the 2.5 billion dollar Osage trust case was denied, on December 19, 2008, by Judge Hewitt’s court. Her reasoning for ruling against the intervention was, in short, that she saw no difference in we, the shareholders, and the new nation. In addition to that, Judge Hewitt deemed that abstract injury was not enough reason to allow intervention. In her words, “…the injury or threat of injury must be both ’real and immediate’ not ’conjectural’ or ’hypothetical.’” Further Judge Hewitt took the position that we have had eight years to bring this litigation and that bringing it now is untimely and too late. It is for these reasons that she ruled against us.

It is my opinion that Judge Hewitt did not fully appreciate many of the facts on the ground here in the Osage. To her point that the intervention was untimely, it is my opinion, that the fact that there was a major change in government type and focus, and the ramification that has had on we the shareholders was not fully appreciated. In reference to her point that injury must be both “real and immediate” it is my opinion that this is real and immediate, as I will demonstrate later in this writing. On this point I simply disagree with the reasoning in the ruling. Lastly, Judge Hewitt’s opinion that the nation and the shareholders are one and the same, I think, does not fully consider our property rights as shareholders and what the ramifications of that mean. I think without growing up Osage and gaining an understanding of our institutions through experience and observation it can be near impossible to explain the system to an outside-uninterested party. In my opinion, often those who seek to diminish our mineral estate use this fact to their advantage. Also, the obfuscation of the mineral estate created by HR2912 only further clouds an already difficult situation for an outsider to understand.

In her ruling against the intervention Judge Hewitt noted that Wilson Pipestem filed a summary judgment on December 2, 2008 seeking a settlement in this litigation. This fact seems to have gone unnoticed by everyone that has read and commented on the Judge Hewitt’s opinion as posted on the mineral councils web site. We, the litigants, read this and then sought to find the specifics of this motion filed by Mr. Pipestem at the direction of the Trust Team. We finally received a copy of the settlement that Trust Team is seeking on the 29th of December. In that summary judgment, Mr. Pipestem, at the direction of the Trust Team, seeks to settle the tranche one claim for $254,731,638.43. Is this a settlement for the entire 2.5 billion dollar claim? I don’t know. Will there be a tranche two, three and so on? I don’t know.

I attempted to contact the trust team asking them about the summary judgment entered by Mr. Pipestem. I could only get one of them to respond to me; that was Speaker Mason. He said that he was not aware of any summary judgment. This begs the question: at who’s direction is Mr. Pipestem pursuing this case? If in fact, any members of the trust team are not being kept up to date with the proceeding of the case, then by whose direction is Mr. Pipestem proceeding? Does the trust team exist in anything other than name? What is its function if it’s members apparently aren’t being kept up to date with such important matters as the settlements the nation is seeking. And further how can a trust team claim to represent the interests of those affected by this litigation if they don’t come forward and explain what it is they are pursing.

In the past few months the minerals council has paid Mr. Brickell, (the original attorney hired to litigate this case for the then tribe), $93,000.00 for 30 plus boxes of additional resources and evidence to bolster the efforts of Mr. Pipestem in pursing this case. I spoke with Mr. Brickell after the first of the year and he assured me that he had marked the items for Mr. Pipestem showing him where the government failed in its duties and where it is proven. In our conversation Mr. Brickell seemed somewhat taken aback by the nations seemingly lax attitude about what he had handed over to them.

Are they doing anything with those 30 plus boxes? The short answer is nobody knows. We have been told repeatedly, by our elected officials, that unlike the Cobell case we have a trail of paperwork proving our case. If this is true, I must ask; are we settling for 254 million? Will there be another tranche? How long is this going to be drawn out? If it has taken eight years to reach a discussion concerning a settlement on about 10% of the claim how long is it going to take to litigate the other 90% of the claim? Who is directing the litigation if members of the trust team are unaware of such important happenings as the entrance of summary judgments by the Nation?

Linda Heskett

O.S.A. Chairperson
(918) 642-5648

Lead attorney for the Osage Tribe
Wilson Pipestem
(202) 419-3526
wkpipestem@pipestemlaw.com

Chief Jim Gray, Principal Chief
627 Grandview
P.O. Box 7779
Pawhuska, OK 74056
p: 918/287-5555
f: 918/287-5562

Osage Nation Congress
P.O. Box 1449
813 Grandview
Pawhuska, OK 74056
Tel: (918) 287-5543
Toll-free: 1-866-454-4647
Fax: (918) 287-5571

Archie Mason, Speaker of the Congress
p: 918-810-4291
f: 918-287-5571

Minerals Council
P.O.Box 779
813 Grandview
Pawhuska, Oklahoma 74056
Phone: 918-287-5433
Fax 918-287-2257

John Henry Mashunkashey, Chairman
p: 918-287-7687 Cell
f: (918) 287-2257

Kenneth Bighorse, Councilman
p: 918-287-2362
f: (918) 287-2257

Cynthia J. Boone, Councilwoman
p: 918-287-2920
f: (918) 287-2257

David Earl Dubler, Councilman
p: 918-346-5485-Cell
f: (918) 287-2257

Robert E. Martin,Councilman
f: (918) 287-2257

Jewell Purcell, Councilwoman
p: 918-381-2408
f: (918) 287-2257

Talee Redcorn, Councilman
p: 918-287-7679 Cell
f: (918) 287-2257

Kathryn Red Corn Lynn, Councilwoman
p: 918-639-0501
f: (918) 287-2257

Downloadable copy (PDF)
Civil docket (PDF)

Intervention lawsuit

Intervention n. the procedure under which a third party may join an on-going law-suit, providing the facts and the law issues apply to the intervener as much as to one of the existing contestants. The determination to allow intervention is made by a judge after a petition to intervene and a hearing on the issue.

Contrary to popular rumor the intervention that was undertaken last year is not dead. Last March, Judge Hewitt, disqualified our attorney, Mr. Brickell, due to a conflict of interest in the case. This was due to his previous representation of the then, Osage Tribe. In her ruling on Mr. Brickell’s legal qualifications to represent the interveners Judge Hewitt went far outside the scope of the question at hand, his qualification, and interjected her understanding of political question in which no evidence was presented or oral arguments made to much of what she is addressing.

Since then, we the interveners, Linda Heskett, Julie Wilson, George Tallchief, Cora Jech, Chris Hadlock, Anna Kay Price & Jodell Heath, have retained new legal council, Mr. Ken Crump, at our own expense who is now representing us in this on going matter. Since Mr. Crump has never before represented the Osage in any respect, there will be no question about his ability to act as our attorney.

To clarify some misconceptions, the purpose of our intervention is to make sure that any and all moneys coming out of the ongoing trust case are paid to the headright holders and only the headright holder. Some have made the suggestion that nation has the right to 20% of any settlement, as we see it there is no reason for this claim legally or ethically. Further, we want to see that any monies received are placed directly into the personal IIM account of the headright holders. Some have suggested that it should go to the nation for distribution to the headright holders. As the 1906 act is a living document, as attested by Wilson Pipestem in Judge Hewitt’s court, we believe the payout should follow the historical structure that has been in place and is in compliance with the 1906 act. Given many of the choices that our new young government has made it is our opinion that sending any settlement through the nation may be rife with hazard. We believe that this should be avoided at all cost and is contrary to the law as it currently stands.

If we are successful at intervening other political questions will come out of interjecting ourselves in the case. It is likely that such question will be what document governs the mineral estate, what, if any, control can the new government exercise over our mineral estate and so on and so on. It has been indicated, by Judge Hewitt, that these questions would be sent to another court for answers. It is our intent to reaffirm and further strengthen Logan vs. Anderson and thereby clearly define that the Mineral Council is the sole authority in governing the mineral estate.

We cannot allow this young government, and what we consider to have been demonstrated as a poorly written constitution, to govern our mineral estate and that certainly includes handling any payout of settlements form this trust suit and beyond that lease payments or lease auctions or any other monies derived form our mineral estate. We must take action to protect ourselves and preserve our mineral estate. This intervention is the first step in taking back what has been stripped from us.

In our opinion it has been demonstrated by the mineral council, with the exception of three representatives, that no other course of action is open to us. It is our opinion that the majority of minerals council members do not hold the interest of our headrights as tantamount to all else. There seems to be no other course open to us other than taking legal action. Three votes on the minerals council, though appreciated and deserving of our respect, is not enough to protect our interests. We must fight for not only our property rights (headrights) but we must fight for the right to govern our property without the input of uninterested parties who have nothing at stake.

We the litigators have taken on a huge financial burden in fighting to see that money payments go to, we, the headright holders and in so doing fight to protect our property rights and our mineral estate. We would greatly appreciate any help in paying these legal bills. The cost is near overwhelming and any amount would be greatly appreciated. We’re seven people, none of us wealthy by any means, and we are fighting a Goliath, of the Osage Nation, with huge gaming revenues at their disposal and who have a willingness to spend great amounts on attorneys. We need your help. We can not do this alone. I ask you to help us. Please send whatever you can to:

Concerned Osages
C/O Osage Federal Bank
P.O.Box 26
Pawhuska, OK 74056

Anything you can give is greatly appreciated. Thank you and feel free to call me anytime at 918-642-5648.

Linda Heskett
Chairperson, OSA