Cline et al v. Sunoco, Inc. (R&M) et al, No. 6:2017cv00313 - Document 231 (E.D. Okla. 2019)
Court Description: OPINION by Judge John A. Gibney, Jr (Re: 142 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment) (tls, Deputy Clerk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Cline et al v. Sunoco, Inc. (R&M) et al Doc. 231 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA PERRY CLINE,on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 6:17-cv-313-JAG V. SUNOCO,INC.(R&M),and, SUNOCO PARTNERS MARKETING & TERMINALS, L.P., Defendants. OPINION Perry Cline represents class members who own interests in oil wells in Oklahoma. The defendants, Sunoco, Inc.(R&M),and Sunoco Partners Marketing & Terminals, L.P.("Sunoco"), purchase and sell oil from the wells. Sunoco pays the class members proceeds when it sells the oil. Oklahoma's Production Revenue Standards Act("PRSA") governs when Sunoco must pay those proceeds and imposes statutory interest for paying the proceeds late. See Okla. Stat. tit. 52, ยง 570, et seq. Cline has sued Sunoco for failing to pay the statutory interest on late payments it made on oil proceeds. Cline has moved for partial summary judgment on two issues: (1) whether Sunoco violates the PRSA by not paying statutory interest on late royalty payments until an owner demands that interest; and (2) whether the PRSA requires Sunoco to pay the statutory interest at the same time it makes the late payments. Because the Court concludes that Sunoco must pay the statutory interest without a demand and at the same time it makes the late payment, the Court will grant Cline's motion for partial summary judgment. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
