Estate of Algerine Allen Smith - Page 9




                                        - 9 -                                         
          judgment and a brief in support of its motion against the royalty           
          interest owners.  Exxon argued that it should recover the pro               
          rata share of all amounts paid to the U.S. Treasury as a result             
          of the DOE litigation, including prejudgment and postjudgment               
          interest.  Also on January 16, 1990, the royalty and working                
          interest owners filed a joint motion for summary judgment and a             
          memorandum in support of their motion against Exxon.  In their              
          accompanying memorandum, the interest owners denied that any                
          amounts were owed to Exxon, regardless of whether any liability             
          under law could attach to them, because Exxon had not, in fact,             
          suffered any loss in paying the approximately $2.1 billion                  
          judgment.5                                                                  
               On March 14, 1990, the royalty interest owners filed a joint           
          opposition to Exxon’s motion for partial summary judgment.  In              
          the joint opposition, the interest owners alleged that Exxon had            
          “profited handsomely from its overcharges” and that the elderly             
          interest owners faced “a very real risk” that they would not be             
          able to recoup in their lifetimes any payments made to Exxon                
          through tax-loss carryforwards to offset prior overpayments of              
          income taxes attributable to the overcharges.  On April 19, 1990,           
          Exxon filed a reply to the royalty interest owners’ joint                   
          opposition to Exxon’s motion for partial summary judgment.  In              


               5The Allen parties expressly adopted the joint motion for              
          summary judgment filed on Jan. 16, 1990.                                    





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