Litigation and Other Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2011

Litigation and Other Contingencies

Litigation and Other Contingencies

2. Litigation and Other Contingencies

Litigation

A variety of claims have been made against ExxonMobil and certain of its consolidated subsidiaries in a number of pending lawsuits. Management has regular litigation reviews, including updates from corporate and outside counsel, to assess the need for accounting recognition or disclosure of these contingencies. The Corporation accrues an undiscounted liability for those contingencies where the incurrence of a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. If a range of amounts can be reasonably estimated and no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, then the minimum of the range is accrued. The Corporation does not record liabilities when the likelihood that the liability has been incurred is probable but the amount cannot be reasonably estimated or when the liability is believed to be only reasonably possible or remote. For contingencies where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible and which are significant, the Corporation discloses the nature of the contingency and, where feasible, an estimate of the possible loss. ExxonMobil will continue to defend itself vigorously in these matters. Based on a consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances, the Corporation does not believe the ultimate outcome of any currently pending lawsuit against ExxonMobil will have a materially adverse effect upon the Corporation's operations, financial condition, or financial statements taken as a whole.

On June 30, 2011, a state district court jury in Baltimore County, Maryland returned a verdict against Exxon Mobil Corporation in Allison, et al v. Exxon Mobil Corporation, a case involving an accidental 26,000 gallon gasoline leak at a suburban Baltimore service station. The verdict included approximately $497 million in compensatory damages and approximately $1.0 billion in punitive damages in a finding that ExxonMobil fraudulently misled the plaintiff-residents about the events leading up to the leak, the leak's discovery, and the nature and extent of any groundwater contamination. ExxonMobil believes the verdict is not justified by the evidence and that the amount of the award is grossly excessive and unconstitutional. ExxonMobil's post trial motion to overturn the punitive damages verdict is pending before the trial court. In the event ExxonMobil is not granted relief from the verdict, it will appeal the decision following entry of final judgment. In a prior trial involving the same leak, the jury awarded plaintiff-residents compensatory damages but decided against punitive damages. That case is on appeal. The ultimate outcome of this litigation is not expected to have a material adverse effect upon the Corporation's operations, financial condition, or financial statements taken as a whole.

Other Contingencies

	As of June 30, 2011
	Equity Company Obligations		Other Third Party Obligations		Total
	(millions of dollars)
Total guarantees	$	6,433	$	3,185	$	9,618

The Corporation and certain of its consolidated subsidiaries were contingently liable at June 30, 2011, for $9,618 million, primarily relating to guarantees for notes, loans and performance under contracts. Included in this amount were guarantees by consolidated affiliates of $6,433 million, representing ExxonMobil's share of obligations of certain equity companies. These guarantees are not reasonably likely to have a material effect on the Corporation's financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources.

Additionally, the Corporation and its affiliates have numerous long-term sales and purchase commitments in their various business activities, all of which are expected to be fulfilled with no adverse consequences material to the Corporation's operations or financial condition. The Corporation's outstanding unconditional purchase obligations at June 30, 2011, were similar to those at the prior year-end period. Unconditional purchase obligations as defined by accounting standards are those long-term commitments that are noncancelable or cancelable only under certain conditions, and that third parties have used to secure financing for the facilities that will provide the contracted goods or services.

The operations and earnings of the Corporation and its affiliates throughout the world have been, and may in the future be, affected from time to time in varying degree by political developments and laws and regulations, such as forced divestiture of assets; restrictions on production, imports and exports; price controls; tax increases and retroactive tax claims; expropriation of property; cancellation of contract rights and environmental regulations. Both the likelihood of such occurrences and their overall effect upon the Corporation vary greatly from country to country and are not predictable.

In accordance with a nationalization decree issued by Venezuela's president in February 2007, by May 1, 2007, a subsidiary of the Venezuelan National Oil Company (PdVSA) assumed the operatorship of the Cerro Negro Heavy Oil Project. This Project had been operated and owned by ExxonMobil affiliates holding a 41.67 percent ownership interest in the Project. The decree also required conversion of the Cerro Negro Project into a "mixed enterprise" and an increase in PdVSA's or one of its affiliate's ownership interest in the Project, with the stipulation that if ExxonMobil refused to accept the terms for the formation of the mixed enterprise within a specified period of time, the government would "directly assume the activities" carried out by the joint venture. ExxonMobil refused to accede to the terms proffered by the government, and on June 27, 2007, the government expropriated ExxonMobil's 41.67 percent interest in the Cerro Negro Project.

On September 6, 2007, affiliates of ExxonMobil filed a Request for Arbitration with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) invoking ICSID jurisdiction under Venezuela's Investment Law and the Netherlands-Venezuela Bilateral Investment Treaty. The ICSID Tribunal issued a decision on June 10, 2010, finding that it had jurisdiction to proceed on the basis of the Netherlands-Venezuela Bilateral Investment Treaty. The ICSID arbitration proceeding is continuing and a hearing on the merits is currently scheduled for the first quarter of 2012. An affiliate of ExxonMobil has also filed an arbitration under the rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) against PdVSA and a PdVSA affiliate for breach of their contractual obligations under certain Cerro Negro Project agreements. A hearing on the merits of the ICC arbitration concluded in September 2010 and the parties have filed post-hearing briefs. At this time, the net impact of this matter on the Corporation's consolidated financial results cannot be reasonably estimated. However, the Corporation does not expect the resolution to have a material effect upon the Corporation's operations or financial condition. ExxonMobil's remaining net book investment in Cerro Negro producing assets is about $750 million.