15. 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. For purposes of our contingency disclosures, "significant" includes material matters as well as other matters which management believes should be disclosed. 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 material 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 plantiff-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 compensatory award is grossly excessive and the imposition of punitive damages is improper and unconstitutional. The trial court denied a post-trial motion that ExxonMobil filed to overturn the punitive damages verdict. Following the entry of a final judgment, ExxonMobil will appeal the verdict and judgment. In a prior trial involving the same leak, the jury awarded plantiff-residents compensatory damages but decided against punitive damages. The plaintiffs did not appeal the jury's denial of punitive damages. Following an appeal by ExxonMobil of the compensatory damages award, on February 9, 2012, the Maryland Special Court of Appeals reversed in part and affirmed in part the trial court's decision on compensatory damages. 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. The Corporation and certain of its consolidated subsidiaries were contingently liable at December 31, 2011, for guarantees relating to notes, loans and performance under contracts.


	Dec. 31, 2011
	Equity Company Obligations(1)		Other Third-Party Obligations		Total
	(millions of dollars)
Guarantees
Debt-related	$	1,546	$	65	$	1,611
Other		3,061		3,784		6,845
Total	$	4,607	$	3,849	$	8,456

(1)

ExxonMobil share.

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. 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.


	Payments Due by Period
	2012		2013- 2016		2017 and Beyond		Total
	(millions of dollars)

Unconditional purchase obligations (1)	$	243	$	660	$	410	$	1,313

(1)

Undiscounted obligations of $1,313 million mainly pertain to pipeline throughput agreements and include $856 million of obligations to equity companies. The present value of these commitments, which excludes imputed interest of $229 million, totaled $1,084 million.

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. ExxonMobil's remaining net book investment in Cerro Negro producing assets was about $750 million at year-end 2011.

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 was held in February 2012. At this time, the net impact of these matters on the Corporation's consolidated financial results cannot be reasonably estimated. Regardless, the Corporation does not expect the resolution to have a material effect upon the Corporation's operations or financial condition.

An affiliate of ExxonMobil, Mobil Cerro Negro, Ltd. (MCN), also filed an arbitration under the rules of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) against PdVSA and a PdVSA affiliate, PdVSA CN, for breach of their contractual obligations under certain Cerro Negro Project agreements. On December 23, 2011, the tribunal rendered its award which found PdVSA and PdVSA CN jointly and severally liable to MCN in the amount of about $908 million. The tribunal deducted approximately $161 million of uncontested debt owed by MCN to PdVSA and PdVSA CN, leaving a balance of about $747 million. Post-award interest on this net amount was set at the New York prime rate compounded annually and running from the date of the award. The tribunal granted PdVSA and PdVSA CN a sixty-day grace period in which to comply with the award. On January 26, 2012, MCN filed a motion to confirm the award against PdVSA CN. In response to an order to show cause filed by PdVSA on January 17, 2012, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on February 1, 2012, ordered the release to MCN of approximately $305 million of PdVSA CN funds previously attached in connection with the arbitration in partial satisfaction of the award. MCN received those funds on February 10, 2012. In further satisfaction of the award, PdVSA cancelled approximately $195 million in MCN bond debt on February 13, 2012. PdVSA paid MCN the balance of the monetary portion of the award on February 14, 2012.

An affiliate of ExxonMobil is one of the Contractors under a Production Sharing Contract (PSC) with the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) covering the Erha block located in the offshore waters of Nigeria. ExxonMobil's affiliate is the operator of the block and owns a 56.25 percent interest under the PSC. The Contractors are in dispute with NNPC regarding NNPC's lifting of crude oil in excess of its entitlement under the terms of the PSC. In accordance with the terms of the PSC, the Contractors initiated arbitration in Abuja, Nigeria, under the Nigerian Arbitration and Conciliation Act. On October 24, 2011, a three-member arbitral Tribunal issued an award upholding the Contractors' position in all material respects and awarding damages to the Contractors jointly in an amount of approximately $1.8 billion plus $234 million in accrued interest. The Contractors have petitioned a Nigerian federal court for enforcement of the award, and NNPC has petitioned the same court to have the award set aside. Those proceedings are pending. At this time, the net impact of this matter on the Corporation's consolidated financial results cannot be reasonably estimated. However, regardless of the outcome of enforcement proceedings, the Corporation does not expect the proceedings to have a material effect upon the Corporation's operations or financial condition.