Monday, October 29, 2007

Your Next Punitive Damage Case

The Supreme Court has accepted review of the Exxon Valdez case. Some law students were not in grade school when an oil tanker was grounded in Prince William Sound spilling a lot of oil on pristine Alaskan shorelines. Clearly, the case represents one of the worst DWI situations in history. But, 18 years of litigation later, and Exxon (who makes more in one quarter's earnings that the entire punitive damage award) is howling about having to pay $2.5 billion in punitive damages.

I think $2.5 billion is a lot of money. I think $30 billion per quarter is a lot of money. Can the Court really believe that it will establish a principle of constitutional law that will be generally applicable in a case that is unique in its facts, and has a unique defendant. And, should the Court write an opinion that really applies only to Exxon's situation, it will stray farther from the mainstream of American thought than it has in my lifetime. (Honestly, other than Exxon shareholders, what American doesn't believe that Exxon deserves punishment for this?)This award will not seriously harm Exxon; it will not cause oil prices to change; it will not do anything other than to prick the finger of shareholder earnings (which have probably already accounted for the award as though it were to be paid). In other words, a win for Exxon is probably a windfall for its shareholders.

Regrettably, my advice is to load up on Exxon stock. (which, by the way, is already moving up on this announcement)

No comments: