This is a post about the Pointe Vista legal case. It may be a little long but I urge you to look through it and I strongly urge you to share it with anyone you think may be interested, particularly including members of the legal profession, the media and any of our esteemed politicians you care to include. As many of you know, the Oklahoma Land Commissioners have filed suit in Oklahoma County against Pointe Vista Development. The case is CJ-2014-152. A copy of the Court Docket, including digital copies of all filed pleadings and exhibits, is available online. Here is the address, oscn.net/applications/oscn/GetCaseInformation.asp?number=CJ-2014-152&db=Oklahoma&submitted=true The Petition was filed by the Land office on 01/09/14. It contains the allegations against Pointe Vista and accompanying exhibits. A total of 254 pages. These include copies of the contracts and several letters. On 03/17/14, Pointe Vista filed their Answer and Counterclaim. This contains their allegations against the Land Office and accompanying exhibits. A total of 258 pages. Together they make long, dry, but interesting readings. Additionally, I spent some time looking through some of the pertinent records in the Marshall County Clerks Office. It appears to my unlicensed eye that the Bank of Oklahoma currently has a mortgage on a portion of the the old Lake Texoma State Park south of US 70. As near as I can figure it was in the initial amount of approximately $9 million dollars. It appears to my unlicensed eye that the Liberty National Bank currently has two mortgages on a portion of the the old Park North of US 70, including the present golf course. As near as I can figure it was in the initial amounts were approximately $4-6 million dollars. My unlicensed and purely personal perusal of these assorted public documents raised several questions and observations in my feeble mind. 1. If Bank of Oklahoma and Liberty National Bank, or any other person/enity has a mortgage on the land in question. Arent they necessary parties? Shouldnt they be named as Defendants in the lawsuit? What happens if the Land Office and Pointe Vista settle the case and then the banks foreclose? 2. On page 216 of the digitized Answer and Counterclaim of Pointe Vista, Covenant 13.1, it appears to my laymans eye that the Oklahoma State Department of Tourism is required to replace the campgrounds and facilities in the are known as the Boot and Rooster Creek with equal campgrounds and facilities somewhere on Lake Texoma. Has this been done or even started? If not, why not? 3. Have the leasees whose businesses were closed by the agreement like the Fun Park and/or Riding Stables been paid? If not, why not? 4. Why is a lawsuit centering on Marshall County land being heard in Oklahoma County? Shouldnt it be heard here? Is it because Oklahoma City lawyers, politicians, and bureaucrats dont like traveling to the hinterlands or is it in the expectation that fewer awkward questions will get asked. This post contains only my personal opinions and observations based on my limited perusals. If I am in error, please let me know, Ill try to correct it. If you have legal questions, talk to someone approved of and licensed by the state of Oklahoma. If you wish to repost, share, or comment, (good or bad), please feel free. J. Minter
Posted on: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 02:08:56 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015