Legal Advice Blog: Legal Advice, Case Insights, & Local Law Information

It goes without saying that trucks are massive. And, it also goes without saying that most trucking companies and drivers do their utmost to keep the public safe. There are numerous state and federal organizations, laws and procedures to ensure that the trucking industry safely maintains their trucks and buses and that their drivers are well rested and not operating under the influence of drugs or alcohol. But, we also recognize that things can go wrong, very wrong – just do the math: Force = mass x acceleration. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is one of many such organizations. The FMCSA’s primary mission is to prevent commercial motor vehicle-related fatalities and injuries. Activities of the administration contribute to ensuring safety in motor carrier operations through strong enforcement of safety regulations; targeting high-risk carriers and commercial motor vehicle drivers; improving safety information systems and commercial motor vehicle technologies; strengthening commercial motor vehicle equipment and operating standards; and increasing safety awareness. To accomplish these activities, the Administration works with Federal, State, and local enforcement agencies, the motor carrier industry, labor and safety interest groups, and others. To this end, the FMCSA Safety and Fitness Electronic Records (SAFER) System offers company safety data and related services to industry and the public over the Internet. Users can search FMCSA databases, register for a USDOT number, pay fines online, order company safety profiles, challenge FMCSA data using the DataQs system, access the Hazardous Material Route registry, obtain National Crash and Out of Service rates for Hazmat Permit Registration, get printable registration forms and find information about other FMCSA Information Systems. You can also learn about a company’s Compliance, Safety and Accountability also known as its CSA Scores.  The Safety Measurement System uses data from roadside inspections and crash reports over a two-year period, along with data from investigations to identify and intervene with motor carriers that pose the greatest risk to our roadways.  Points are assigned for unsafe behaviors, along with monetary penalties. If you are involved  in a collision with a commercial motor vehicle it is important to speak with an experienced transportation attorney who can make sure that any unfavorable documentation/information on the trucking company is preserved and used in the litigation process if allowable.

I previously shared with you my first experience of being called “grandma.” Now, I can say I am no longer a “first time” grandma. After a lot of thought, discussion, and down-right guilt-trips (by our dog-you know, those sad eyes that make you feel so guilty when you’ve done nothing to feel guilty about), we decided it was time for him to have a brother and playmate. It was a very difficult decision to make because I now had the experience of the “puppy days”. By “puppy days,” I don’t mean the cute, roly-poly, clumsy, puppy breath things. I mean the going outside every two hours, the constant energy, the rushing home to make sure their needs are met, the messes, and the chewing on everything because they are teething. Although I honestly was enjoying the quiet and for the most part relaxing evenings, we agreed that an addition to the family would be in the best interest of our dog, and us by extension. A happy dog makes a happy (less destroyed) home! So, we began our search. Of course, we wanted to rescue a dog from the shelter, so we spent hours researching the local shelters; but we had never done this before and didn’t want this to have a negative impact on our dog or the “adopted” dog who may have already been traumatized. We honestly didn’t know how our dog was going to react. We finally agreed that our new addition would need to be a puppy. My daughter looked at a lot of puppies, but there was one that really caught her eye…and they weren’t very far from us. The “meeting” of the dogs was set up, with my daughter telling me that she was “NOT coming home with a puppy.” Well, you don’t have to be a mom to know that any animal lover who meets an available puppy IS going to come home with a new puppy. The “meet and greet” went very well. Both the dog and the puppy behaved well and seemed to like one another – so we came home with my second “granddog.” I think our dog thought this was just a “play date” and once he realized the puppy was staying, he did as any older sibling would do – “No, that’s mine!!  I’m not sharing my toys, my food, my mom, my grandma…” The first week was very difficult. Through the sleep deprivation and exhaustion, we had many moments where we questioned whether we had made the right decision. Then we would see them playing together, running in the yard, and the smile on their faces, and that reassured us that it was going to work out great. We know it is going to take work, patience, discipline, and time, but the outcome is going to make it all worth it! So, to all you first-time puppy owners, I encourage you not to give up. I believe puppies are more work than babies, but they will grow up and will no longer require the exhausting care-giving that newborns require. So, just as any new parent, nap when they nap; provide training and discipline (which can be more exhausting than exercise); do what it takes to drain their energy; enlist the help of family and friends; give yourself breaks; and most of all enjoy watching them grow! Remember, they grow up faster than babies!

July 20 th is the anniversary of the first manned mission to land on the Moon. In 1961 President John F. Kennedy announced the goal he had set. The goal was before the end of the decade a man will land on the Moon and return safely. He accomplished this goal July 20 th, 1969 from the Kennedy Space Center. The “Space Race” was ended with the launch of the Apollo 11. An estimated 600 million people around the world tuned in to watch the historic event. Not only did President Kennedy deliver on his promise of sending a man to the moon he also made well on his promise of bringing them home safely. Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and crew returned safely home from the Moon and became legends. The astronauts were celebrated with a vast amount of parades and personal appearances. The famous quote from Neil Armstrong, “That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind” is still etched into the American psyche. The Apollo project was one of the United States most expensive projects costing roughly $25.4 billion. But well worth the money, the Moon landing inspired new generations to become scientists. Also, the technology of the Apollo 11 led to the development of space stations and new spacecrafts. The moon landing was deemed impossible, but NASA scientist made it possible.

The proposed Equal Rights Amendment (“ERA”) provides that the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution apply equally to all persons regardless of their sex. It is very brief: Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification. The ERA was introduced in 1923, three years after the 19 th Amendment (granting women the right to vote) was ratified. In 1972, the ERA was finally passed by Congress and sent to the states for ratification. The original seven-year time limit was extended by Congress to June 30, 1982, but that deadline passed with only 35 states on board — 38 states were needed for ratification. The ERA has been introduced into every Congress since the deadline. The ERA has had something of a resuscitation this year. About two months ago, on May 31, 2018, Illinois voted to ratify the ERA, some 36 years after the original deadline for ratification was set by Congress. Some opponents of the amendment said that voting on it now is merely symbolic, noting that the protections that it outlines already apply to women today. Supporters, on the other hand, note that it is more important now than ever for the government to acknowledge clearly that women and men have equal rights under the law, citing the #MeToo movement and its revelations. Indeed, the #MeToo movement has underscored the importance of strong legal protections for women’s rights. The approval by Illinois sets up the possibility that one of the remaining states may want to move forward as the decisive vote to ratify. To be sure, there is a hurdle, so how would it work?  Supporters look to history, including the founding document. Six months after the Constitution went into effect, James Madison offered 17 amendments to the founding document. Congress ultimately approved 12, and by 1791, the states had ratified the first 10, which became the Bill of Rights. One of Madison’s amendments continued to slowly work its way through the states more than 200 years after congressional approval. Finally, in May 1992, Michigan became the 38 th state to ratify, making the 27 th Amendment the law. It provides that salary increases for members of Congress do not go into effect until the term after they were approved. Supporters of the ERA look to this history and ask, why did the ERA even have a deadline? There appear to be a couple of ways to revive the ERA completely, should one more state ratify it. A 2013 report of the Congressional Research Service, an office of the legislative branch, in its analysis has concluded that Congress could simply vote to change the old deadline. Or it simply might pass a brand-new amendment, which would most likely, as would a “new” amendment, require the states to ratify the ERA again. The states that have not ratified the ERA are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana and Mississippi.

Recently, in the case of Walsh v. Bayer, et al., the Pennsylvania Superior Court analyzed a trial court’s dismissal of a “junk science” claim in connection with its application of Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923). Specifically, at issue was whether Mr. Thomas J. Walsh’s forty-year occupational exposure to defendants’ pesticides, some of which contain known carcinogens and teratogens, was a substantial contributing factor in his death due to Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (“AML”). Mr. Walsh was employed for almost 40 years as a groundskeeper and golf course superintendent at several golf courses in the Pittsburgh area. During his employment, he frequently and regularly applied pesticides on the golf courses. He kept a diary of the chemicals used on the courses and the dates of their applications. His friend and coworker offered specific details about how the two men applied the pesticides, what pesticides were used, in what concentrations and the protective gear worn. On October 5, 2008, Mr. Walsh presented to the emergency room complaining of fever, chills, and a cough. Three days later, after a bone marrow biopsy, he was diagnosed with AML. Subsequent cytogenetic testing at West Penn Hospital showed chromosomal aberrations consistent with secondary leukemias, which are linked to radiation, chemotherapy, or chemical exposure. Mr. Walsh died on February 2, 2009. His treating oncologist later opined that Mr. Walsh’s extensive chemical exposure, together with “the high-risk karyotype and dyspoietic features associated with raise a high degree of suspicion that such exposure played a significant role in the development of his disease.” Wrongful death and survival action were initiated against the manufacturers of various pesticides that Mr. Walsh applied over the forty-year period, asserting claims in strict products liability, negligence, and breach of warranty. Plaintiff’s experts testified that epidemiological studies that have examined the association between pesticide exposure and leukemia risk have consistently shown a positive association, some estimates demonstrating a two-fold increase in risk. She opined that organophosphate pesticide formulations, individually or in combination, causally related to an increased risk of leukemia in humans exposed to them. The defendants filed a “ Frye” motion to exclude plaintiff’s experts, from testifying at trial, arguing that the methodologies used by these experts were not generally accepted or conventionally applied in the relevant scientific communities. After reviewing the depositions of the experts and the parties’ briefs, the trial court granted the defendants’ Frye motions and precluded the testimony of Executor’s experts, effectively dismissing the case. According to the Superior Court, Frye contemplates a judicial inquiry, informed by experts, into the general acceptance of the scientific methods used, not the conclusions reached by the experts. In this case, the Superior Court found considerable support (over 700 articles) for plaintiff’s position that the link between pesticides and cancer has crossed the threshold from novel to general acceptance. The Court highlighted that both the defendants and the trial court agreed that the “Bradford Hill” methodology that the plaintiff’s experts utilized was appropriate. Here, the Superior Court found that the trial court scrutinized the studies cited by plaintiff’s experts, assessed their scientific relevance and validity, and then arrived at its own conclusion whether the expert’s reliance upon them was scientifically acceptable. In doing so, the Superior Court determined that the trial court impermissibly set itself up as a “super expert” in the field of medicine, which is beyond the purview of Frye. Instead, the Court found that the scientific literature, in the aggregate, supports a causal relationship between long-term pesticide exposure and leukemia, such as AML. Thus, the court held that for purposes of Frye, an expert need not rely on studies that mirror the exact facts under consideration. It is sufficient if the synthesis of various legitimate studies reasonably permits the conclusion reached by the expert. The absence of a treatise or study directly on point goes to the weight, not the admissibility, of expert opinion. An expert’s opinion will satisfy Frye when it is deduced from generally accepted scientific principles and supported by studies or literature, even where the expert could not point to one study involving parallel circumstances. The Court further held that since Frye is an exclusionary rule of evidence, “it must be construed narrowly so as not to impede admissibility of evidence that will aid the trier of fact in the search for truth.” Therefore, the Court reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded for further proceedings.

In all accidents involving large trucks, it is vital that attorneys perform a proper truck accident investigation. At Bordas and Bordas we use comprehensive programs to ensure no stone is left unturned. Among the plethora of steps taken to prepare a truck accident investigation and later litigate a truck crash case we: (1) Preserve all evidence during the truck accident investigation; (2) Obtain police and other agency reports; (3) Obtain witness reports; (4) Acquire coroner reports; (5) Obtain the black box data if the truck was equipped with an ECM (Electronic Control Module); (6) Obtain the subject vehicle’s black box data if it was equipped with an EDR (Event Data Recorder) or SDM (Sensing and Diagnostic Module); (7) Acquire the truck’s GPS (Global Positioning System) data; (8) Learn about the motor carrier and its licenses, insurance, safety record, etc.; (9) Get the full background and history on the driver; (10) Secure a truck accident reconstruction expert; (11) If the truck driver committed a criminal act which caused the accident, we will communicate closely with the prosecuting attorney in charge of any criminal proceedings against the truck driver; (12) Determine the best legal venue determined by substantive law and choice of law issues and (13) Prepare and file the lawsuit. We want the community to understand that commercial trucking companies (and their insurance carriers) face significant costs if they are held liable for personal injuries or fatalities caused by a trucking collision. As someone who defended trucking companies for over 15-years, within minutes after these catastrophic collisions they are sending investigators, lawyers and other personnel to the accident scene. It is their job to control the accident scene, shield the driver from giving damaging statements and preserve evidence in a light most favorable to their clients. From our years of experience handling complex truck collision investigation and litigation, we know how to effectively detect negligence and causes of the truck wreck, such as: Negligent truck safety Negligence in securing cargo Driver log falsification Over Hours of Service Speeding Truck driver fatigue Driver distractions Defective road design Bad weather Failure to enforce training procedures Other factors If you or a loved one has been involved in a collision with a commercial motor vehicle please feel free to call us with any questions you may have or ask us how we can help.

This past Thursday, a St. Louis jury delivered a staggering verdict against Johnson & Johnson on behalf of 22 ovarian cancer victims whose cancer the jury found to be caused by these women’s exposure to Johnson & Johnson’s asbestos-containing talcum powder. The jury slammed J&J with an eye-popping $550 million in compensatory damages and another $4.14 billion in punitive damages for a total verdict of $4.69 billion (with a “B”). After a six-week trial, it took the St. Louis Circuit Court jury less than a full day to deliberate and return a verdict in favor of the claims of 22 women, six of whom have died, against J&J and its subsidiary Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. The jury unanimously held both J&J and J&J Consumer strictly liable and liable for negligence as to all of the plaintiffs. The jury voted 11-1 for the J&J punitive damages verdict, and unanimously for the J&J Consumer punitive damages verdict. For the better part of two years now, juries across the country have been rendering verdicts against J&J to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, making their voices heard time and time again in support of the unwitting victims of J&J’s Shower-to-Shower and other talcum powder-based consumer products. But last week’s verdict was, by far, the loudest outcry yet against the company who, the evidence shows, knew all about the deadly hazards of its talcum powder products at least four decades ago, while doing nothing to warn the American consumer and continuing to market and promote its talc products as perfectly safe, particularly for women of all ages. J&J continues to deny any wrongdoing and tries to cast the jurors who stand up to it as uninformed dupes who are having the wool pulled over their eyes by “slick-talking” lawyers. But the record size and punitive nature of the verdicts that continue to be delivered against J&J, through the country by ordinary Americans from all walks of life, is a clear signal that there is ample scientific evidence to support the link between exposure to J&J talcum powder products and ovarian cancer, as well as ample evidence that J&J knew and tried to cover up that danger to the American consumer. And that the average juror understands exactly the nature and scope of the harm J&J has vested upon thousands of women in the name of profit. The public could not be any clearer in telling J&J to pull its talc products from shelves and sell only its safe cornstarch alternative instead. Here’s hoping it will finally listen. If you suspect you have been the victim of J&J’s dangerous talcum powder products, you should contact an experienced lawyer right away to discuss your rights.

This week, I want to take a break from legal and political commentary and simply give our readers a “heads up” on a great vacation idea. It’s called the Boundary Waters Canoe Area, and if you enjoy fishing and the outdoors as much as I do, it will be the trip of a lifetime for you and your family or friends. The BWCA consists of a little more than 1 million acres of water and wilderness that extends along the US/Canada border in Northern Minnesota. It has been carefully cultivated and regulated by the two countries with an eye toward protecting and maintaining the wilderness, and from what I have seen throughout my years of traveling there, they are doing a really good job. Permits are required to enter and camp, and the number of campers in a particular area is strictly limited. No glass containers of any type are permitted. And the big thing — the one that I think does the most to keep the area pristine — is that motors are not permitted. So, if you want to get from point A to point B, jump in your canoe and start paddling. Your trip to the BWCA will begin with a flight into Minneapolis. From there, you drive north for a bit over four hours to the quaint little town of Ely. There you will find outfitters, restaurants, and unique stores galore. Any camping necessities you forgot to pack will be available somewhere in Ely. I suggest the Ely Steakhouse for the best meal in town, or for a few adult beverages on the back end of your trip. From Ely you will travel to your outfitter to prepare for your trip. I have been using Moose Bay Lodge ( www.moosebay.com) since I first started making this trip, and owner John Herrick really knows what he is doing. He can also give you a few tips on catching fish; he holds the world-record for smallmouth bass on a fly rod. You’ll be fishing the same waters that produced his world-record catch. On the day you head into the BWCA, you’ll be traveling in a motor boat with your 20-foot canoe strapped on top of a rack attached to the boat. You will check in at the ranger station at the border, and then head off into the wilderness. When you hit the restricted area, you put the canoe into the water; transfer everything from the boat to the canoe; hop in and start paddling. I have done trips where the paddle was as short as 45 minutes, or as long as 4 hours. Everything depends upon where you are going and which way the wind is blowing. Paddling a big, loaded canoe into a stiff wind is a serious workout. Trust me on that one. An experienced guide is a necessity, as handling that big canoe in rough water is darn near impossible for those who have not done it previously. Your outfitter can set you up with a good guide. Once you hit your campsite, the fun begins. You set up your tents, rig up your fishing tackle, and head out. Smallmouth bass are the fish of choice in the BWCA, although there a plenty of big pike and some walleye as well. But for my money, it’s the smallies that make the trip worth taking. 2-3 pounders are the average, but I can almost guarantee you will catch some 4 and 5  pound hogs during your trip. It’s all catch and release (except for what you keep for dinner), and in over 10 years of taking this trip, I’ve never had a bad week of fishing. This year, my buddy Rich and I kept track of the fish we caught throughout 1 day. We fished just a little over 4 hours, during which time we caught a total of 77 fish. We were in a bay filled with Northern Pike when the guide called “last cast”, and each of us hooked a pike that was 10+ pounds on those casts. Unbelievable. Some folks call camping in the BWCA “roughing it”. Those folks haven’t been there before. We eat steak, pork chops, grilled/fried fish, ceviche, wine, cheese, and anything else you want to take with you, space and weight permitting. All of the pictures included with this article are from the BWCA. The one with my son and the dog gazing out over the lake is from our usual campsite. The pictures will give you some idea of what it’s like up there. For me, it’s a stress-reliever like no other. Give it a try, and feel free to call me at our Moundsville office if you have any questions.

Corporations are a ubiquitous part of modern life. A corporation is a legal entity that exists separate and distinct from its owners. Advantages of a corporation include limited liability for its shareholders, a perpetual existence and ease of transferring ownership interests. Corporations come in two forms, C corporation and S corporation, and each has distinct advantages and disadvantages. The C corporation is the most common form of incorporation. It is a separate legal entity that is owned by shareholders. Most large, publicly traded companies are C corporations. S corporations combine most of the advantages of C corporations with a better tax structure for the owners. The income of an S corporation is not taxed at the corporate level. Instead, the reported income is passed through to the owners where it is taxed at personal tax rates. Corporations enjoy a type of personhood and have at least some of the legal rights and responsibilities enjoyed by natural persons – the ability to enter into contracts for instance. But corporations are very much a legal construct and to maintain the benefits of the corporate form, corporate formalities must be followed. Owners who fail to take the appropriate steps to maintain the corporation as a separate entity run the risk of having the “corporate veil pierced” and being held personally liable for any corporate transgressions. Under West Virginia law, see e.g., Laya v. Erin Homes, Inc., 177 W.Va. 343, 347, 352 S.E.2d 93, 98 (1986), Courts consider a number of factors where a litigant attempts to pierce the corporate veil. These factors include the identity of the directors and officers of two entities who are responsible for supervision and management (a partnership or sole proprietorship and a corporation owned and managed by the same parties); the absence of separately held corporate assets; the use of a corporation as a mere shell or conduit to operate a single venture or some particular aspect of the business of an individual or another corporation; use of the same office or business location by the corporation and its individual shareholder(s); employment of the same employees or attorney by the corporation and its shareholder(s); disregard of legal formalities and failure to maintain proper arm's length relationships among related entities; use of a corporate entity as a conduit to procure labor, services or merchandise for another person or entity; or the use of a corporation as a subterfuge for illegal transactions. While corporations are fairly straightforward to establish, their continued existence requires constant attention and nurturing to maintain the advantages and benefits of the form. For any West Virginia business owners thinking of incorporating, it is important to understand and remain mindful of the Laya factors to maximize the benefits the corporate form offers.

If you’re looking for a quick, delicious dessert to make during these summer months, but without baking, you’re going to love this! I found the recipe for this no-bake peanut butter pie via Pinterest and each time I’ve made it, it’s been a hit. You will need: 8 ounces cream cheese (softened) 1 cup creamy peanut butter 1 cup confectioners’ sugar 1/4 cup milk 1 teaspoon vanilla extract 2 – 8-ounce containers of frozen cool whip, thawed 9- inch store bought chocolate Oreo pie crust Chocolate syrup for garnish (optional) Peanut butter chips for garnish (optional) Follow these steps: Using an electric mixer beat cream cheese, peanut butter, sugar, milk and vanilla extract in a large bowl until creamy. Fold in 1 of the 8-ounce containers of cool whip. Reserve the other container of cool whip for serving. Spread mixture into prepared pie crust. Chill pie in the refrigerator for at least 4 hours or overnight. Before serving, top pie with remaining cool whip. Garnish with chocolate syrup and peanut butter chips if desired. It’s delish! See for yourself.

In an effort to combat identity theft, the Federal Government has begun issuing new Medicare cards to all Medicare recipients. In 2015, the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act required that the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) remove Social Security Numbers from Medicare cards by April 2019. The new cards will automatically be mailed out. Once you receive your new card, you should destroy your old card and begin using the new card. The new cards remove your Social Security Number (“SSN”) from the cards and replace that with a new Medicare Beneficiary Identifier (MBI) Number. The new numbers, which are 11 characters in length, are made up from a unique random combination of both numbers and letters. The MBI uses the numbers 0 through 9 and all the letters in the alphabet except S, L, O, I, B and Z, which are never used. Be on the lookout for scams. Medicare will never call you uninvited and ask that you provide personal or private information to obtain a new Medicare Number or card.  According to the Medicare website, as of June 25, 2018 mailing out of the new MDI Cards has been completed in both Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Mailing to residents of Ohio is expected to begin soon. It is important to note that receiving a new MBI won’t change your Medicare benefits. You should begin using the new MDI as soon as you receive it when seeking medical care or treatment. The effective date on the new MBI is the same as the date on the old card, it is the date each beneficiary was or is eligible for Medicare. If you have other coverage such as a Medicare Advantage Plan, Prescription Drug Plan or Medicaid, you new MBI Card does not replace the card that you use from your plan. You should still use your existing plan card when you receive medical care or prescription. However, you’ll need your new MBI Card if you want to join, leave, or switch to a different plan. You may also be asked to show your new MBI Card if you require hospital services. Always remember, never give your new MBI to anyone other than your doctor, pharmacists, other health care providers, your insurer or people you trust to work with Medicare on your behalf.

Many landowners in Ohio have known about the Ohio Dormant Mineral Act. Originally enacted as part of the Ohio Marketable Title Act it was passed in 1989 and went fully into effect in 1992 after a three-year waiting period which was designed to allow landowners the opportunity to protect their rights. One of the purposes of the act was supposedly to make it easier to determine who was the owner of old severed oil and gas mineral interests. The act itself, however, never applied to coal ownership. The law provided, generally, that certain mineral interest could be deemed abandoned if they had not been used by the original owner, or their heirs and assigns, during a 20-year window. The law was amended in 2006 and at that time additional requirements were added which more clearly stated that a landowner wishing to claim abandonment needed to take certain actions and provide certain types of notice to the mineral owners who might be subject to losing their interests. The question remained, however, what happened with those mineral interests that could be deemed abandoned under the old version of the law. Neither version of law was passed with a vision to the billions of dollars that would be at stake with the advent of the Marcellus and Utica Shale plays. The sheer amount of money at issue made for large scale and numerous legal attacks and litigation related to the Ohio Dormant Mineral Act. Just over a year and a half ago the Ohio Supreme Court, in a surprising ruling, attempted to provide some simplification and guidance regarding the two laws. The Court ruled that the original 1989 Act was not self-executing. That meant that even if the requirements of claiming the abandonment of a mineral interest were met, the landowner still had to do something to claim those rights. They had to file some time-of-action in the court system to affirm their claims. The majority thinking before that decision was that the law did not require such action and the mineral interest reattached to the surface interest automatically. The court determined after the new law went into effect in 2006, that a landowner had to then comply with the provision of the 2006 act to claim abandonment and had to undertake the more stringent research and notice requirements. This has now led to a whole host of new litigation issues including potential claims that attorneys performing ODMA work might have committed malpractice. Much of the litigation and unrest now lies in the question of whether attorneys and landowners conducted sufficient due diligence and research to find the heirs of the old severed mineral interest. For many years it seemed that research in the county recorder, probate and/or tax offices would be sufficient to identify the heirs of long lost reservations. Now it seems that this research might not be enough. Are you required to research genealogical databases or simply conduct web searches for people and addresses? Many people who did hire attorneys and proceed under the requirements of the 2006 act are now being sued or contacted by people claiming that they should have received notice of the abandonment claims and should have had the opportunity to respond accordingly. What was supposed to have become a settled area of law which clearer ownership has continued to be a muddied mess. Unfortunately, even for people who signed leases and were paid based on the provision of the ODMA, you might still face uncertainty and litigations.