MONTGOMERY – Alabama’s suit accusing Exxon Mobil of shortchanging the state on natural gas royalties produced a record verdict of $3.5 billion at the first trial. In the retrial, the state ____ an ever bigger verdict.

State attorneys asked a jury Wednesday to return a verdict of $9.3 billion.

There is one language Exxon Mobil understands and understands well money,” state attorney Robert Cunningham told the jury.

Exxon Mobil attorneys said the company had followed its leases with the state for natural gas wells in state-owned waters along the Alabama coast and owes the state nothing.

“In the end what the state is asking you to do is change the deal,” company attorney Chris King said.

Closing arguments in the four-week trial were conducted Wednesday, and jury deliberations were scheduled today.

The state sued Exxon Mobil in 1999, contending the company had intentionally deducted too much in expenses for operating its natural gas wells along the Alabama coast and had defrauded the state out of millions in royalties.

A Montgomery jury in 2000 returned a record verdict of $3.5 billion – six times the state’s previous record – but it was overturned by the Alabama Supreme Court, which said the jury was wrongly allowed to see an internal memo. That prompted a new trial that began Oct. 20.

Cunningham said Alabama drafted a unique lease for oil companies drilling along the coast. He said the lease required oil companies to pay royalties on gross proceeds, but Exxon Mobil deducted expenses like it would have on traditional, industry-friendly leases for processing the natural gas.

Cunningham said the state had been shorted $63.6 million in royalties and that the loss could have climbed to as much as $930 million over the 30-year life of the natural gas field in Mobil Bay. He asked the jury to return a verdict 10 times the potential loss, or $9.3 billion.

State attorney Jere Beasley said anything less than $4 billion “would be a clear victory for Exxon.”

Exxon Mobil’s attorneys said its interpretation of the lease followed memos from the state Conservation Department that said the company could deduct the “reasonable direct cost of manufacture and transportation.”

“There’s not one piece of paper where they say no deduction,” King said.

Exxon Mobil attorney Sam Franklin urged the jury not to lump the oil company with Enron, WorldCom and others involved in corporate accounting scandals. “It is not happening in this case,” Franklin said.



We're here to help!

We live by our creed of "helping those who need it most" and have helped thousands of clients get the justice they desperately needed and deserved. If you feel you have a case or just have questions please contact us for a free consultation. There is no risk and no fees unless we win for you.

Fields marked    may be required for submission.
  1. I'm an attorney

Judge Sides with Exxon in Payment Dispute with State

The billions that state officials had once coveted from the largest jury verdict in Alabama history is...

Another Voice on the Exxon Case

A recent editorial appeared in the Montgomery Independent dealing with the court's ruling in favor of...

Jim Martin Speaks Out on Exxon

Jim Martin, who served as Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources...

High Court Nullifies Exxon Jury Verdict

The Alabama Supreme Court, by tossing nearly 99 percent of a $3.6 billion verdict against ExxonMobil,...

Exxon Juror Laments Decision

The Alabama Supreme Court has slapped the citizens of Alabama in the face with their corporate-loyal...

State Supreme Court Ruling May Put Freeze on...

The state Legislature may not have as much money to open up programs they wanted after the Alabama Court...

Lawyers and staff continue to help me

I suffered from an allergic reaction to a common medication causing permanent injury when I was 15 years old. My settlement allows me to take care of myself instead of being on disability. Even after my case was over, the lawyers and staff continue to help me.

—Tamika