SAN DIEGO, Feb. 1, 2000- (PRIMEZONE) -- A California Court of Appeal yesterday unanimously ruled that ARCO (NYSE:ARC) and eight other oil companies were entitled to summary judgment in Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Company, et al., because "there is no evidence of an agreement among them," to fix prices or limit the supply of cleaner-burning gasoline mandated by California.
The Court of Appeal, after examining all of the evidence in the case in a meticulous 144-page opinion, ruled that the Superior Court of San Diego had correctly decided the case in favor of ARCO and the other defendants without a trial in October 1997. Although the lower court later granted a motion for new trial, the Court of Appeal found that the original summary judgment order was correct, and agreed with the "exhaustive and well-reasoned" opinion issued by the trial court in October 1997. Specifically, the Court of Appeal agreed with the trial court's original conclusion that "the evidence Plaintiffs provided to the Court suggests not a complex tangled web, but nine defendants using all available information sources to determine capacity, supply and pricing decisions which would maximize their own individual profits - without regard to the profits of their competitors."
ARCO, which continued to pursue its low-cost, high-volume competitive strategy in connection with the implementation of the state's gasoline requirements, said it is gratified by the Court's decision.