- 7 -
On March 25, 1983, the U.S. District Court for the District
of Columbia ruled that Exxon had violated the two-tier pricing
regulations. United States v. Exxon Corp., 561 F. Supp. 816
(D.D.C. 1983) (Exxon I). The District Court entered judgment in
favor of the DOE and ordered Exxon to make restitution to the
U.S. Treasury (Treasury) of the full amount of HFU overcharges
plus interest arising from sales of HFU crude oil for the period
January 1, 1975, through January 27, 1981. The total amount of
the judgment exceeded $895 million. On July 1, 1985, the
Temporary Emergency Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court.
United States v. Exxon Corp., 773 F.2d 1240 (Temp. Emer. Ct. App.
1985).
On February 27, 1986, Exxon paid the judgment, which
amounted to just under $2.1 billion with interest. The amount
paid consisted of $895,501,164 in overcharges, $771,997,881 in
prejudgment interest, and $428,273,813 in postjudgment interest.
On January 26, 1988, Exxon filed suit in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Tyler Division) against
the owners of royalty and mineral interests in the HFU. Exxon v.
Arnold, docket No. TY-88-110-CA (E.D. Tex., Jan. 26, 1988).
Exxon's suit was consolidated with the Jarvis Christian
litigation at docket No. TY-80-432-CA (Consolidated Action).5
Exxon sought reimbursement from the interest owners of the
5Hereinafter, we shall refer to this consolidated action as
the Jarvis Christian litigation.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011