About Us
Photo by Ian Dooley
Photo by Jeff W
50 Years of Experience
John Lee has worked as an engineer, a litigator and an oil and gas administrative law judge. A lifetime of experience, working hands-on in the industry, both in the field and in the courtroom, makes him a skillful and effective mediator, particularly for commercial oil and gas related cases.
As your Mediator, I will apply all my knowledge and experience to assist all parties in reaching a voluntary, confidential, economical and acceptable final resolution to your dispute.
In mediation, you are the master of your settlement. In the spirit of give and take in a reasonable manner, without sacrificing truth but appreciating the perspective of your opposition, you can resolve your case on acceptable terms.
Trial preparation, the trial itself and the ensuing appellate process are all costly, not only in fees and expenses but also in time and frustration. Trials of commercial disputes, especially in oil and gas related cases; most always involve the testimony of paid experts. Relying on Judges and/or juries to render a favorable decision, all of whom are unfamiliar with the esoteric jargon and the factual intricacies integral to each party’s case, is risky.
Successful mediation eliminates all the risk of trial. It resolves your conflict with finality much faster and cheaper than trial and appeal. All litigants and their lawyers should heed the admonition of Voltaire: “I was never ruined but twice — once when I lost a lawsuit, once when I won one.”
Why Choose Us
Holistic Practice
Our understanding of oil & gas law comes from hands-on experience on job sites as petroleum engineers, as well as years of courtroom experience as both an administrative law judge and litigator. Our legal guidance comes from a foundation of seasoned technical expertise, grounded in real life application.
Timely Solutions
The energy industry moves fast. Mediation is a much quicker & more cost effective means of resolving a dispute than litigation. We help our clients overcome obstacles & find a resolution that gets them back to business.
Industry Expertise
The complexity of oil & gas disputes requires a mediator with an interdisciplinary understanding of the issues. Each case is unique but with a lifetime of case history to build on, our team can find a fast resolution that works for you.
Photo by Justin Bennett
Our Team
John E. Lee, III
Mr. Lee holds a Bachelor of Science degree in petroleum engineering from the Colorado School of Mines and a Juris Doctor degree in law from the Oklahoma City University School of Law.
Mr. Lee’s experience in the field of petroleum engineering includes drilling, completion and workover design and supervision on oil and gas wells in the United States, South China Sea, Venezuela, Argentina and Peru. He has prepared reservoir studies and economic evaluations for major oil companies, independent oil companies and individuals.
He has frequently testified as an expert in the field of petroleum engineering before regulatory bodies and district courts, as well as consulted with oil and gas trial lawyers to identify experts and to prepare them for direct and cross-examination.
Mr. Lee served as an administrative law judge for the Oil and Gas Conservation Division of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission.
Mr. Lee has represented corporate and individual clients in oil and gas litigation before the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, before Oklahoma District Court and before all Oklahoma Federal District Courts.
Melissa D. Firestone
Ms. Firestone holds a Bachelor of Science degree and a Master of Science degree in economics from the University of Wyoming.
Ms. Firestone has more than eighteen years of experience in the US energy market with expertise in the US natural gas and public utility industries.
Her expertise includes supply/demand modeling of US natural gas markets to accurately project US natural gas storage seasonal balances and weekly withdrawals/injections to inform trading and hedging decisions.
Her experience includes analyzing pipeline constraints, regional import/export flows, and planned pipeline build out to inform basis price modeling and analyzing and formulating outlooks for US oil prices.
She also has extensive experience with regulated utilities focusing on cost of service, revenue requirements, and rate design – wholesale and retail electricity and natural gas.
Notable Cases
Mr. Lee represented vertical well operator Andy Sheen, winning a judgment against Devon Energy in the first case in Oklahoma wherein a plaintiff recovered damages for destruction of its oil and gas well by the defendant’s hydraulic fracture stimulation of nearby horizontal well.
While serving as an oil and gas administrative law judge for the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, Mr. Lee was the trial judge for the hearing on the merits of the defendant’s application to establish a 640-acre drilling and spacing unit for the Tonkawa reservoir, a common source of supply. Plaintiff contested the application, arguing that an earlier Commission order established the same tract as a 640-acre drilling and spacing unit for the Douglas reservoir, and that because the Tonkawa was a mere part of the Douglas reservoir, the Kamax application should be denied.
Mr. Lee concluded that the Kamax application should be granted under the legal doctrine of esjudem generis — the Commission had already allowed a 640-acre drilling and spacing unit for an abutting section of the Tonkawa. The Commission adopted Mr. Lee’s reasoning, granting the Kamax application. The order was later affirmed in the Court of Civil appeals.
Mr. Lee represented Castlerock Resources, Inc. in a title dispute about the ownership of a mineral interest underlying an 80-acre tract in Pushmataha County, Oklahoma, located in the very prolific Potato Hills Field. The case was filed in September 2000 and was fervently litigated through 2009.
The case centered on a Depression-era conveyance entitled “Sale of Oil and Gas Royalty” dated April 20, 1931, whereunder Andrew and Theresa Slotta conveyed “an undivided 1/16 interest in all the oil, gas and other minerals” underlying the 80-acre tract, along with “an undivided one-half interest in all right, title and estate” under and by virtue of any existing or future oil and gas lease, to Gracie Renegar.
Gracie Renegar’s successors sold all of their respective mineral interests underlying the 80-acre tract to Castlerock Resources, Inc. under warranty mineral deeds dated November 22, 1999, and February 22, 2000, respectively.
Andrew and Theresa Slotta’s successors filed suit claiming they owned 15/16’s and that Gracie Renegar’s successors owned 1/16.
Castlerock Resources, Inc., represented by Mr. Lee, answered claiming that it owned 1/2.
The trial court agreed with Castlerock Resources, Inc. and the Slotta successors appealed. In May 2005, the Court of Civil Appeals held that the 1931 “Sale of Oil and Gas Royalty” is ambiguous and remanded the case to the trial court to clarify the ambiguity by examining extrinsic evidence to determine the intent of the parties.
Upon remand, the trial court again agreed with Castlerock Resources, Inc., and again, the Slotta successors appealed. Finally, in early 2009, the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling in favor Castlerock Resources, Inc.
Mr. Lee represented Twenty Twenty Oil & Gas, Inc. in a case Fuksa Investments, Inc. filed in 2012 in Garfield County, Oklahoma. Fuksa claimed that under a 2004 fill-in-the-blank instrument entitled “Assignment of Interest in Oil & Gas Lease,” it acquired all of the defendant’s interest in an oil and gas well known as the Estill Unit No. 1, along with all of the defendant’s oil and gas leasehold interest in the larger 640-acre tract, Section 19, Township 21 North, Range 8 West. The lease in dispute describes the Estill Unit No. 1 as located within “NW SE Sec.19-21N-8W.”
According to Twenty Twenty’s President, as well as one of Fuksa’s partners, Mr. James Lott, all parties had intended that only the Estill Unit No. 1 well was to be conveyed, not all 640 acres.
In ruling on competing motions for summary judgment, the trial court determined that Fuksa Investments, Inc. received the Estill Unit No. 1 along with the oil and gas leasehold interest in the 40 acres described as NW/4 SE/4 Sec.19. T21N, R8W.
Fuksa Investments, Inc. appealed.
The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling that assignment by Twenty Twenty Oil & Gas Inc. to Fuksa Investments, Inc. covered only wellbore and 40 leasehold acres and not 640 leasehold acres.