TEN-YEAR TIMELINE OF EXXON VALDEZ LITIGATION

March 24, 1989: Exxon Valdez grounds on Bligh Reef and spills 11 million gallons of crude oil.
May 2, 1994: Trial begins in federal court - +5 years after spill.
September 16,1994: Jury in federal court returns $5 billion punitive damages verdict in Phase III of case.
September 30, 1994: Exxon files 12 motions to overturn the jury verdicts.
October 3, 1994: Exxon files 3 motions to overturn the jury verdicts.
January 27, 1995: Judge Holland denies Exxon's motions to overturn the jury verdicts (Order 267).
February 7, 1995: Exxon files motion asking to depose the jurors and a motion to adjust the Phase IIA verdict.
February 7, 1995: Exxon files motion to reconsider the order re: chum price and to reconsider order re: UCI setnetter harvest.
May 5, 1995: Judge Holland denies Exxon's motion to reconsider the jury verdict regarding chum salmon price.
June 13 and 14, 1995: Judge Holland conducts jury interviews.
July 12,1995: Exxon files motion to depose Juror Rita Wilson and Reporter Natalie Phillips.
July 12,1995: Exxon seeks access to Jurors Murray and Dean original juror questionnaires filed under seal.
August 11, 1995: Judge Holland denied Exxon's motion for the juror questionnaires.
August 16, 1995: Judge Holland denied Exxon's motion to depose Wilson and Phillips.
September 6, 1995: Exxon files motion for a new trial claiming juror misconduct and coercion.
October 24, 1995: Exxon files motion to amend the Phase 11(a) findings and adjust verdict re: UCI setnetters.
October 24, 1995: Exxon files motion attacking punitive damages verdict.
November 13,1995: Exxon opposes Plaintiffs' motion to finalize the Phase IIA verdict.
February 14,1996: Plaintiffs are served with a complaint for declaratory relief from the Seattle Seven seeking a percentage of plaintiffs' damages on behalf of Exxon
February 20,1996: Judge Holland denies Exxon's motion for new trial based on possible juror misconduct and coercion (Order 308).
March 6, 1996: Seattle Seven intervene in litigation on behalf of Exxon.
March 18, 1996: Exxon files motion attacking punitive damage verdict and Seattle Seven object to Plan of Allocation acting on Exxon's behalf.
April 5, 1996: Judge Holland denied Exxon's fourth attack on the UCI setnetter verdict (Order 316).
June 11, 1996: Judge Holland approves Plan of Allocation and denounces Seattle Seven/Exxon scheme (Order 317).
June 18,1996: Exxon files motion to reconsider Court's order re: Seattle Seven.
August 6,1996: Judge Holland rejects Exxon's attempt to attack the punitive damages verdict based on credits claimed from the Seattle Seven releases (Order 326).
September 6,1996: Judge Holland denies Exxon's motion to reconsider order re: Seattle Seven finding that Exxon perpetuated a deception upon the court and the jury (Order 327).
September 24,1996: Judgment finally entered on federal court jury verdicts, including $5 Billion punitive damages award - +7 years after spill -- +2 years after verdict.
September 30,1996: Exxon and Seattle Seven file joint notice of appeal on Seattle Seven kickback.
October 8, 1996: Exxon files motion to alter or amend the judgment and files its bill of costs against certain plaintiffs.
November 20, 1996: Judge Holland dismisses the Seattle Seven complaint with prejudice.
December 19,1996: Seattle Seven and Exxon file appeal challenging dismissal of complaint.
January 17, 1997: Judge Holland issues order on Exxon's Motion to Amend Judgment (Order 332).
February 12, 1997: Exxon files notice of appeal to Ninth Circuit.
March 18,1997: Plaintiffs filed motion for approval of Plans of Distribution.
September 23,1997: Exxon moved for a new trial on the ground of "newly discovered" evidence.
January 5, 1998: The Ninth Circuit issued a limited remand to permit the district court to consider Exxon's motion for new trial.
March 16,1998: Exxon deposed Juror Rita Wilson.
July 31,1998: Judge Holland denied Exxon's second motion for a new trial (Order 339).
August 7,1998: Exxon filed an appeal on the denial of the second motion for a new trial.
November 27, 1998: Exxon files its final brief in its second motion for a new trial.
May 3, 1999: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting in Seattle, hears Exxon's appeal.

Back to Litigation Page   |   Introdution to Litigation