Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Alabama Department of Conservation & Natural Resources v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided December 12, 2008No. 1070716Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCobb, Chief Justice
I respectfully dissent from Part I of the opinion, interpreting § 9 — 17—33(d), Ala. Code 1975. That Code section states:
“Any first purchaser of production or operator and/or owner of the right to drill substituted for the first commercial purchaser as provided herein, that violates this section shall be liable to the persons legally entitled to the proceeds from production for the unpaid amount of the proceeds plus interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum, the interest *204accruing from the date at which the proceeds were due as specified herein.”
Even though the majority acknowledges that §…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- IMED Corp. v. Systems Engineering Assoc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1992
- Blue Cross and Blue Shield v. NielsenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1998
- City of Bessemer v. McClainSupreme Court of Alabama · 2006
- Ex Parte PrattSupreme Court of Alabama · 2001
- Parker v. HilliardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.