phillips
petroleum
shutts
argued
february
decided
june
petitioner
produced
purchased
natural
gas
leased
land
located
respondents
royalty
owners
possessing
rights
leases
petitioner
produced
gas
brought
class
action
petitioner
kansas
state
seeking
recover
interest
royalty
payments
delayed
petitioner
trial
certified
class
consisting
royalty
owners
respondents
provided
class
member
notice
mail
describing
action
informing
member
appear
person
counsel
otherwise
represented
respondents
class
members
included
class
bound
judgment
unless
opted
action
returning
request
exclusion
final
class
consisted
members
reside
district
columbia
several
foreign
countries
notwithstanding
gas
leases
question
plaintiff
class
members
apparent
connection
kansas
except
lawsuit
trial
applied
kansas
contract
equity
law
every
claim
found
petitioner
liable
interest
suspended
royalties
class
members
kansas
affirmed
petitioner
contentions
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
prevented
kansas
adjudicating
claims
class
members
clause
full
faith
credit
clause
prohibited
application
kansas
law
transactions
petitioner
class
members
held
petitioner
standing
assert
claim
kansas
jurisdiction
class
members
kansas
residents
connection
kansas
whether
wins
loses
merits
petitioner
distinct
personal
interest
seeing
entire
plaintiff
class
bound
res
judicata
petitioner
bound
way
petitioner
assure
binding
effect
ascertain
forum
jurisdiction
every
plaintiff
whose
claim
seeks
adjudicate
sufficient
support
res
judicata
defense
later
suit
class
members
alleged
injury
petitioner
incur
judgment
became
final
without
binding
plaintiff
class
sufficient
give
petitioner
standing
right
raise
jurisdiction
claim
pp
kansas
trial
properly
asserted
personal
jurisdiction
absent
plaintiff
class
members
claims
petitioner
due
process
clause
requires
notice
opportunity
appear
person
counsel
opportunity
opt
adequate
representation
require
absent
class
members
affirmatively
opt
class
rather
deemed
members
class
opt
procedure
followed
kansas
fully
descriptive
notice
sent
mail
class
member
explanation
right
opt
satisfies
due
process
interests
absent
plaintiff
class
members
sufficiently
protected
forum
state
plaintiffs
provided
request
exclusion
returned
within
reasonable
time
trial
pp
kansas
erred
deciding
application
kansas
law
claims
constitutional
kansas
must
significant
contact
aggregation
contacts
claims
asserted
plaintiff
class
member
order
ensure
choice
kansas
law
arbitrary
unfair
given
kansas
lack
interest
claims
unrelated
state
substantive
conflict
kansas
law
law
texas
leased
land
question
located
application
kansas
law
every
claim
case
sufficiently
arbitrary
unfair
exceed
constitutional
limits
pp
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
burger
brennan
white
marshal
blackmun
joined
parts
ii
stevens
joined
stevens
filed
opinion
concurring
part
dissenting
part
post
powell
took
part
decision
case
arthur
miller
argued
cause
petitioner
briefs
joseph
kennedy
robert
coykendall
kenneth
heady
william
paul
cubbage
ii
joel
klein
argued
cause
respondents
brief
luke
chapin
ed
moore
harold
greenleaf
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
legal
foundation
america
david
crump
amoco
production
lucas
powe
landt
glenn
young
alan
morrison
david
vladeck
filed
brief
public
citizen
amicus
curiae
urging
affirmance
david
kahn
filed
brief
consumer
coalition
amicus
curiae
justice
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
petitioner
delaware
corporation
principal
place
business
oklahoma
produced
purchased
natural
gas
leased
land
located
different
sold
gas
interstate
commerce
respondents
royalty
owners
possessing
rights
leases
petitioner
produced
gas
reside
district
columbia
several
foreign
countries
respondents
brought
class
action
petitioner
kansas
state
seeking
recover
interest
royalty
payments
delayed
petitioner
recovered
judgment
trial
kansas
affirmed
judgment
petitioner
contentions
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
prevented
kansas
adjudicating
claims
respondents
due
process
clause
full
faith
credit
clause
article
iv
constitution
prohibited
application
kansas
law
transactions
petitioner
respondents
granted
certiorari
consider
claims
reject
petitioner
jurisdictional
claim
sustain
claim
regarding
choice
law
petitioner
sold
gas
customers
interstate
commerce
required
secure
approval
price
increases
federal
power
commission
federal
energy
regulatory
commission
regulations
federal
power
commission
permitted
petitioner
propose
collect
tentative
higher
gas
prices
subject
final
approval
commission
commission
eventually
denied
petitioner
proposed
price
increase
reduced
proposed
increase
petitioner
refund
customers
difference
approved
price
higher
price
charged
plus
interest
rate
set
statute
see
cfr
although
petitioner
received
higher
gas
prices
pending
review
commission
petitioner
suspended
increase
royalties
paid
royalty
owners
higher
price
subject
recoupment
petitioner
customers
petitioner
agreed
pay
higher
royalty
royalty
owners
provide
petitioner
bond
indemnity
increase
plus
interest
case
price
increase
ultimately
approved
refund
due
customers
petitioner
set
interest
rate
indemnity
agreements
interest
rate
commission
required
petitioner
refund
customers
small
percentage
royalty
owners
provided
indemnity
received
royalties
immediately
interim
price
increases
royalty
owners
unimportant
case
remaining
royalty
owners
received
royalty
unapproved
portion
prices
federal
power
commission
approval
prices
became
final
royalties
unapproved
portion
gas
price
suspended
three
times
petitioner
corresponding
three
proposed
price
increases
three
written
opinions
commission
approved
petitioner
tentative
price
increases
petitioner
paid
royalty
owners
suspended
royalties
million
million
million
petitioner
paid
interest
royalty
owners
although
use
suspended
royalty
money
number
years
respondents
irl
shutts
robert
anderson
betty
anderson
filed
suit
petitioner
kansas
state
seeking
interest
payments
suspended
royalties
petitioner
possessed
pending
commission
approval
price
increases
shutts
resident
kansas
andersons
live
oklahoma
shutts
andersons
gas
leases
oklahoma
texas
petitioner
objection
kansas
trial
granted
respondents
motion
certify
suit
class
action
kansas
law
stat
ann
et
seq
class
certified
comprised
royalty
owners
royalties
suspended
petitioner
average
claim
royalty
owner
interest
suspended
royalties
class
certified
respondents
provided
class
member
notice
mail
notice
described
action
informed
class
member
appear
person
counsel
otherwise
member
represented
shutts
andersons
named
plaintiffs
notices
also
stated
class
members
included
class
bound
judgment
unless
opted
lawsuit
executing
returning
request
exclusion
included
notice
final
class
certified
contained
members
opted
class
returning
request
exclusion
notice
delivered
another
members
also
excluded
less
class
members
resided
kansas
minuscule
amount
approximately
one
quarter
one
percent
gas
leases
involved
lawsuit
kansas
land
petitioner
mandamus
petition
decertify
class
denied
phillips
petroleum
duckworth
june
cert
denied
case
tried
found
petitioner
liable
kansas
law
interest
suspended
royalties
class
members
trial
relied
heavily
earlier
unrelated
class
action
involving
nominal
plaintiff
defendant
shutts
executor
phillips
petroleum
cert
denied
kansas
held
shutts
executor
gas
company
owed
interest
royalty
owners
royalties
suspended
pending
final
commission
approval
price
increase
federal
statutes
touched
liability
suspended
royalties
shutts
executor
held
matter
kansas
equity
law
applicable
interest
rates
computation
interest
suspended
royalties
interest
rates
gas
company
reimburse
customers
interim
price
increase
rejected
commission
shutts
executor
viewed
fairest
interest
rates
also
rates
petitioner
required
royalty
owners
meet
indemnity
agreements
order
avoid
suspended
royalties
trial
present
case
applied
rule
shutts
executor
held
petitioner
liable
prejudgment
postjudgment
interest
suspended
royalties
computed
commission
rates
governing
petitioner
three
price
increases
see
cfr
applicable
interest
rates
royalties
retained
october
royalties
retained
october
september
thereafter
average
prime
rate
trial
determine
whether
difference
existed
laws
kansas
whether
another
state
laws
applied
plaintiffs
royalties
leases
kansas
petitioner
raised
two
principal
claims
appeal
kansas
first
asserted
kansas
trial
possess
personal
jurisdiction
absent
plaintiff
class
members
required
international
shoe
washington
similar
cases
related
first
claim
petitioner
contention
notice
absent
class
members
forced
return
request
exclusion
order
avoid
suit
insufficient
bind
class
members
residents
kansas
possess
minimum
contacts
kansas
second
petitioner
claimed
kansas
courts
apply
kansas
law
every
claim
dispute
trial
looked
laws
state
leases
located
determine
basis
conflict
laws
principles
whether
interest
suspended
royalties
recoverable
rate
kansas
held
entire
cause
action
maintainable
kansas
statute
rejected
petitioner
claims
first
held
absent
class
members
plaintiffs
defendants
thus
traditional
minimum
contacts
test
international
shoe
apply
held
nonresident
plaintiffs
entitled
adequate
notice
opportunity
heard
opportunity
opt
case
adequate
representation
named
plaintiffs
procedural
due
process
minima
met
according
kansas
assert
jurisdiction
plaintiff
class
bind
class
member
judgment
claim
surveyed
course
litigation
concluded
minima
met
also
rejected
petitioner
contention
kansas
law
applied
plaintiffs
royalty
arrangements
connection
kansas
stated
generally
law
forum
controlled
claims
unless
compelling
reasons
existed
apply
different
law
found
compelling
reasons
noted
plaintiff
class
members
indicated
desire
action
determined
laws
kansas
affirmed
matter
kansas
equity
law
award
interest
suspended
royalties
rates
imposed
trial
set
postjudgment
interest
rate
claims
kansas
statutory
rate
threshold
matter
must
determine
whether
petitioner
standing
assert
claim
kansas
possess
proper
jurisdiction
many
plaintiffs
class
kansas
residents
connection
kansas
respondents
claim
party
generally
may
assert
rights
petitioner
standing
assert
rights
adversary
plaintiff
class
order
defeat
judgment
favor
class
standing
sue
article
iii
course
federal
question
depend
party
prior
standing
state
doremus
board
education
baker
carr
generally
stated
federal
standing
requires
allegation
present
immediate
injury
fact
party
requesting
standing
alleged
personal
stake
outcome
controversy
assure
concrete
adverseness
sharpens
presentation
issues
ibid
must
causal
connection
asserted
injury
challenged
action
injury
must
type
likely
redressed
favorable
decision
valley
forge
christian
college
americans
separation
church
state
see
simon
eastern
kentucky
welfare
rights
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
dev
additional
prudential
limitations
standing
may
exist
even
though
article
iii
requirements
met
judiciary
seeks
avoid
deciding
questions
broad
social
import
individual
rights
vindicated
limit
access
federal
courts
litigants
best
suited
assert
particular
claim
gladstone
realtors
village
bellwood
one
prudential
limits
standing
litigant
must
normally
assert
legal
interests
rather
third
parties
see
singleton
wulff
craig
boren
respondents
claim
petitioner
barred
rule
requiring
party
assert
rights
point
respondents
petitioner
adversaries
allied
interests
petitioner
good
proponent
class
members
interests
urge
petitioner
interference
unneeded
class
members
opportunity
complain
kansas
assertion
jurisdiction
claim
none
done
see
singleton
supra
respondents
may
correct
petitioner
possess
standing
jus
tertii
issue
petitioner
seeks
vindicate
interests
defendant
petitioner
unique
predicament
kansas
possess
jurisdiction
plaintiff
class
petitioner
bound
judgment
holders
scattered
across
globe
none
bound
kansas
decree
petitioner
subject
numerous
later
individual
suits
class
members
judgment
issued
without
proper
personal
jurisdiction
absent
party
entitled
full
faith
credit
elsewhere
thus
res
judicata
effect
party
whether
wins
loses
merits
petitioner
distinct
personal
interest
seeing
entire
plaintiff
class
bound
res
judicata
petitioner
bound
way
defendant
like
petitioner
assure
binding
effect
judgment
ascertain
forum
jurisdiction
every
plaintiff
whose
claim
seeks
adjudicate
sufficient
support
defense
res
judicata
later
suit
damages
class
members
true
adjudicating
dispute
may
able
predetermine
res
judicata
effect
judgment
petitioner
alleged
obviously
immediately
injured
judgment
became
final
without
binding
plaintiff
class
think
injury
sufficient
give
petitioner
standing
right
raise
jurisdiction
claim
petitioner
posture
somewhat
similar
trust
settlor
defendant
hanson
denckla
found
standing
challenge
forum
personal
jurisdiction
trust
company
indispensable
party
forum
state
law
proceed
action
without
jurisdiction
trust
company
observed
defendant
affected
judgment
ha
direct
substantial
personal
interest
outcome
necessary
challenge
whether
jurisdiction
fact
acquired
quoting
chicago
atchison
ii
reduced
essentials
petitioner
argument
unless
plaintiffs
affirmatively
consent
kansas
courts
may
exert
jurisdiction
claims
petitioner
claims
failure
execute
return
request
exclusion
provided
class
notice
constitute
consent
plaintiffs
thus
kansas
courts
may
exercise
jurisdiction
plaintiffs
plaintiffs
possess
sufficient
minimum
contacts
kansas
term
used
cases
involving
personal
jurisdiction
defendants
international
shoe
washington
shaffer
heitner
volkswagen
woodson
since
kansas
prelitigation
contact
many
plaintiffs
leases
involved
petitioner
claims
kansas
exceeded
jurisdictional
reach
thereby
violated
due
process
rights
absent
plaintiffs
international
shoe
faced
corporation
sought
avoid
exercise
personal
jurisdiction
defendant
washington
state
held
extent
defendant
due
process
protection
depend
upon
quality
nature
activity
relation
fair
orderly
administration
laws
noted
due
process
clause
permit
state
make
binding
judgment
person
state
contacts
ties
relations
ibid
defendant
possessed
certain
minimum
contacts
state
reasonable
according
traditional
conception
fair
play
substantial
justice
state
exercise
personal
jurisdiction
state
force
defendant
defend
forum
upon
pain
default
bind
judgment
purpose
test
course
protect
defendant
travail
defending
distant
forum
unless
defendant
contacts
forum
make
force
defend
explained
woodson
supra
defendant
contacts
reasonably
anticipate
haled
forum
insurance
ireland
compagnie
des
bauxites
de
guinee
explained
requirement
personal
jurisdiction
comes
due
process
clause
protection
defendant
personal
liberty
interest
said
requirement
represents
restriction
judicial
power
matter
sovereignty
matter
individual
liberty
omitted
although
cases
like
shaffer
woodson
petitioner
relies
minimum
contacts
requirement
dealt
defendants
parties
procedural
posture
defendant
cf
new
york
life
ins
dunlevy
estin
estin
petitioner
claims
analysis
must
apply
absent
plaintiffs
regard
petitioner
correctly
points
chose
action
constitutionally
recognized
property
interest
possessed
plaintiffs
mullane
central
hanover
bank
trust
adverse
judgment
kansas
courts
case
may
extinguish
chose
action
forever
res
judicata
adverse
judgment
petitioner
claims
every
bit
onerous
absent
plaintiff
adverse
judgment
merits
defendant
thus
due
process
protections
apply
absent
plaintiffs
kansas
able
exert
jurisdiction
plaintiffs
claims
unless
plaintiffs
sufficient
minimum
contacts
kansas
think
petitioner
premise
error
burdens
placed
state
upon
absent
plaintiff
order
magnitude
places
upon
absent
defendant
defendant
summoned
plaintiff
faced
full
powers
forum
state
render
judgment
defendant
must
generally
hire
counsel
travel
forum
defend
plaintiff
claim
suffer
default
judgment
defendant
may
forced
participate
extended
often
costly
discovery
forced
respond
damages
comply
form
remedy
imposed
lose
suit
defendant
may
also
face
liability
costs
attorney
fees
burdens
substantial
minimum
contacts
requirement
due
process
clause
prevents
forum
state
unfairly
imposing
upon
defendant
plaintiff
however
quite
different
posture
noted
difference
hansberry
lee
explained
class
representative
suit
exception
rule
one
bound
judgment
personam
unless
one
made
fully
party
traditional
sense
citing
pennoyer
neff
pointed
hansberry
class
action
invention
equity
enable
proceed
decree
suits
number
interested
litigation
great
permit
joinder
absent
parties
bound
decree
long
named
parties
adequately
represented
absent
class
prosecution
litigation
within
common
interest
modern
plaintiff
class
actions
follow
goals
permitting
litigation
suit
involving
common
questions
many
plaintiffs
proper
joinder
class
actions
also
may
permit
plaintiffs
pool
claims
uneconomical
litigate
individually
example
lawsuit
involves
claims
averaging
per
plaintiff
plaintiffs
realistic
day
class
action
available
sharp
contrast
predicament
defendant
haled
forum
plaintiffs
suit
haled
anywhere
defend
upon
pain
default
judgment
commentators
noted
plaintiffs
point
view
class
action
resembles
proceeding
conducted
judge
moore
kennedy
moore
federal
practice
kaplan
continuing
work
civil
committee
amendments
federal
rules
civil
procedure
harv
rev
plaintiff
class
kansas
numerous
jurisdictions
first
certified
unless
judge
aid
named
plaintiffs
defendant
conducts
inquiry
common
nature
named
plaintiffs
absent
plaintiffs
claims
adequacy
representation
jurisdiction
possessed
class
matters
bear
upon
proper
representation
absent
plaintiffs
interest
see
stat
ann
fed
rule
civ
proc
unlike
defendant
civil
suit
plaintiff
required
fend
see
stat
ann
named
plaintiffs
protect
interests
indeed
defendant
great
interest
ensuring
absent
plaintiffs
claims
properly
forum
case
example
defendant
sought
avoid
class
certification
alleging
absent
plaintiffs
adequately
represented
amendable
jurisdiction
see
phillips
petroleum
duckworth
june
concern
typical
rules
absent
plaintiffs
manifested
ways
jurisdictions
including
kansas
require
class
action
certified
may
dismissed
compromised
without
approval
many
jurisdictions
kansas
may
amend
pleadings
ensure
sections
class
represented
adequately
stat
ann
see
also
fed
rule
civ
proc
besides
continuing
solicitude
rights
absent
plaintiff
class
members
subject
burdens
imposed
upon
defendants
need
hire
counsel
appear
almost
never
subject
counter
claims
liability
fees
costs
absent
plaintiff
class
members
subject
coercive
punitive
remedies
adverse
judgment
typically
bind
absent
plaintiff
damages
although
valid
adverse
judgment
may
extinguish
plaintiff
claims
litigated
unlike
defendant
normal
civil
suit
absent
plaintiff
required
anything
may
sit
back
allow
litigation
run
course
content
knowing
safeguards
provided
protection
class
actions
absent
plaintiff
provided
least
opportunity
opt
class
takes
advantage
opportunity
removed
litigation
entirely
true
kansas
proceedings
case
kansas
procedure
provided
mailing
notice
class
member
mail
notice
previously
indicated
described
action
informed
class
member
appear
person
counsel
default
represented
named
plaintiffs
attorneys
notice
stated
class
members
included
class
bound
judgment
unless
opted
executing
returning
request
exclusion
included
notice
petitioner
contends
however
opt
procedure
provided
kansas
good
enough
opt
procedure
required
satisfy
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
insofar
plaintiffs
minimum
contacts
forum
state
concerned
opt
provision
require
class
member
affirmatively
consent
inclusion
within
class
place
fewer
burdens
upon
absent
class
plaintiffs
upon
absent
defendants
nonclass
suits
due
process
clause
need
afford
former
much
protection
jurisdiction
latter
fourteenth
amendment
protect
persons
defendants
however
absent
plaintiffs
well
absent
defendants
entitled
protection
jurisdiction
forum
state
seeks
adjudicate
claims
case
hold
forum
state
may
exercise
jurisdiction
claim
absent
plaintiff
even
though
plaintiff
may
possess
minimum
contacts
forum
support
personal
jurisdiction
defendant
forum
state
wishes
bind
absent
plaintiff
concerning
claim
money
damages
similar
relief
law
must
provide
minimal
procedural
due
process
protection
plaintiff
must
receive
notice
plus
opportunity
heard
participate
litigation
whether
person
counsel
notice
must
best
practicable
reasonably
calculated
circumstances
apprise
interested
parties
pendency
action
afford
opportunity
present
objections
mullane
cf
eisen
carlisle
jacquelin
notice
describe
action
plaintiffs
rights
additionally
hold
due
process
requires
minimum
absent
plaintiff
provided
opportunity
remove
class
executing
returning
opt
request
exclusion
form
finally
due
process
clause
course
requires
named
plaintiff
times
adequately
represent
interests
absent
class
members
hansberry
reject
petitioner
contention
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
requires
absent
plaintiffs
affirmatively
opt
class
rather
deemed
members
class
opt
think
contention
supported
little
precedent
ignores
differences
plaintiffs
one
hand
defendants
nonclass
civil
suits
plaintiff
may
consent
jurisdiction
keeton
hustler
magazine
essential
question
stringent
requirement
showing
consent
think
procedure
followed
kansas
fully
descriptive
notice
sent
mail
class
member
explanation
right
opt
satisfies
due
process
requiring
plaintiff
affirmatively
request
inclusion
probably
impede
prosecution
class
actions
involving
aggregation
small
individual
claims
large
number
claims
required
make
economical
bring
suit
see
eisen
supra
plaintiff
claim
may
small
plaintiff
unfamiliar
law
file
suit
individually
affirmatively
request
inclusion
class
request
required
constitution
hand
plaintiff
claim
sufficiently
large
important
wishes
litigate
likely
retained
attorney
thought
filing
suit
fully
capable
exercising
right
opt
case
members
potential
class
opt
belies
contention
opt
procedures
result
guaranteed
jurisdiction
inertia
another
excluded
notice
opt
form
undeliverable
think
results
show
opt
procedure
provided
kansas
means
pro
forma
constitution
require
protect
must
somewhat
rare
species
class
member
unwilling
execute
opt
form
whose
claim
nonetheless
important
presumed
consent
member
class
failure
petitioner
opt
requirement
require
invalidation
scores
state
statutes
provision
federal
rules
civil
procedure
reasons
stated
think
constitution
requires
state
sacrifice
obvious
advantages
judicial
efficiency
resulting
form
opt
approach
protection
rara
avis
portrayed
petitioner
therefore
hold
protection
afforded
plaintiff
class
members
kansas
statute
satisfies
due
process
clause
interest
absent
plaintiffs
sufficiently
protected
forum
state
plaintiffs
provided
request
exclusion
returned
within
reasonable
time
see
insurance
ireland
kansas
trial
kansas
held
class
received
adequate
representation
party
disputes
conclusion
conclude
kansas
properly
asserted
personal
jurisdiction
absent
plaintiffs
claims
petitioner
iii
kansas
courts
applied
kansas
contract
kansas
equity
law
every
claim
case
notwithstanding
gas
leases
plaintiffs
case
apparent
connection
state
kansas
except
lawsuit
petitioner
protested
kansas
courts
apply
laws
leases
located
least
apply
texas
oklahoma
law
many
leases
came
kansas
courts
disregarded
contention
found
petitioner
liable
interest
suspended
royalties
matter
kansas
law
set
interest
rates
kansas
equity
principles
petitioner
contends
total
application
kansas
substantive
law
violated
constitutional
limitations
choice
law
mandated
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
full
faith
credit
clause
article
iv
must
first
determine
whether
kansas
law
conflicts
material
way
law
apply
injury
applying
kansas
law
conflict
jurisdiction
connected
suit
petitioner
claims
kansas
law
conflicts
number
connected
litigation
especially
texas
oklahoma
putative
conflicts
range
direct
tangential
may
addressed
kansas
remand
correct
constitutional
standard
example
recorded
oklahoma
decision
dealing
interest
liability
suspended
royalties
whether
oklahoma
likely
impose
liability
require
survey
oklahoma
oil
gas
law
even
oklahoma
found
liability
petitioner
shows
oklahoma
likely
apply
constitutional
statutory
interest
rate
rather
much
higher
kansas
rates
applied
litigation
okla
art
xiv
okla
tit
supp
rendezvous
trails
america
ayers
app
smith
robinson
west
edmond
hunton
lime
unit
young
additionally
petitioner
points
oklahoma
statute
excuses
liability
interest
creditor
accepts
payment
full
principal
without
claim
interest
okla
tit
cf
webster
drilling
sterling
oil
oklahoma
petitioner
contends
ignoring
statute
kansas
courts
created
liability
exist
oklahoma
petitioner
also
points
several
conflicts
kansas
texas
law
although
texas
recognizes
interest
liability
suspended
royalties
texas
never
awarded
interest
rate
greater
corresponds
texas
constitutional
statutory
rate
tex
art
tex
rev
civ
stat
art
vernon
see
phillips
petroleum
stahl
petroleum
tex
phillips
petroleum
adams
cert
denied
cf
maxey
texas
commerce
bank
tex
moreover
least
one
interpreting
texas
law
appears
held
texas
excuses
interest
liability
gas
company
offers
take
indemnity
royalty
owner
pay
suspended
royalty
price
increase
still
tentative
phillips
petroleum
riverside
gas
compression
supp
nd
tex
rule
contrary
kansas
law
applied
applied
texas
plaintiffs
leases
case
vastly
reduce
petitioner
liability
conflicts
applicable
interest
rates
alone
think
labeled
false
conflicts
without
thoroughgoing
treatment
accorded
kansas
certainly
amounted
millions
dollars
liability
think
kansas
erred
deciding
basis
application
laws
claims
constitutional
four
terms
ago
addressed
similar
situation
allstate
ins
hague
case
confronted
two
conflicting
rules
state
insurance
law
minnesota
permitted
stacking
separate
uninsured
motorist
policies
wisconsin
although
decedent
lived
wisconsin
took
insurance
policies
killed
employed
minnesota
death
widow
moved
minnesota
reasons
unrelated
litigation
appointed
personal
representative
estate
filed
suit
minnesota
courts
applied
minnesota
stacking
rule
plurality
allstate
noted
particular
set
facts
giving
rise
litigation
justify
constitutionally
application
one
jurisdiction
laws
plurality
recognized
however
due
process
clause
full
faith
credit
clause
provided
modest
restrictions
application
forum
law
restrictions
required
state
substantive
law
selected
constitutionally
permissible
manner
state
must
significant
contact
significant
aggregation
contacts
creating
state
interests
choice
law
neither
arbitrary
fundamentally
unfair
dissenting
justices
substantial
agreement
principle
opinion
powell
joined
burger
rehnquist
dissent
stressed
due
process
clause
prohibited
application
law
casually
slightly
related
litigation
full
faith
credit
clause
required
forum
respect
laws
judgments
subject
forum
interests
furthering
public
policy
plurality
allstate
affirmed
application
minnesota
law
forum
significant
contacts
litigation
supported
state
interest
applying
law
see
kansas
contacts
litigation
explained
kansas
gleaned
opinion
petitioner
owns
property
conducts
substantial
business
state
kansas
certainly
interest
regulating
petitioner
conduct
kansas
moreover
oil
gas
extraction
important
business
kansas
although
leases
issue
located
kansas
hundreds
kansas
plaintiffs
affected
petitioner
suspension
royalties
thus
held
state
real
interest
protecting
rights
royalty
owners
individual
residents
kansas
members
particular
class
plaintiffs
kansas
pointed
kansas
courts
quite
familiar
type
lawsuit
plaintiff
class
members
indicated
desire
action
determined
laws
kansas
finally
kansas
buttressed
use
kansas
law
stating
lawsuit
analogous
suit
common
fund
located
kansas
lightly
discount
description
kansas
contacts
litigation
interest
applying
law
however
common
fund
located
kansas
require
support
application
kansas
law
claims
see
hartford
life
ins
ibs
kansas
noted
petitioner
commingled
suspended
royalties
general
corporate
accounts
specific
identifiable
res
kansas
limited
amount
may
depleted
every
plaintiff
compensated
somehow
aggregating
separate
claims
case
common
fund
sense
created
term
becomes
meaningless
used
expansive
sense
also
give
little
credence
idea
kansas
law
apply
claims
plaintiffs
failing
opt
evinced
desire
bound
kansas
law
even
one
say
plaintiffs
consented
application
kansas
law
opting
plaintiff
desire
forum
law
rarely
ever
controlling
cases
plaintiff
shows
obvious
wish
forum
law
filing
plaintiff
choose
substantive
rules
applied
action
invitation
forum
shopping
irresistible
allstate
supra
opinion
powell
even
plaintiff
evidences
desire
forum
law
moving
forum
generally
accorded
move
little
significance
john
hancock
mut
life
ins
yates
home
ins
dick
allstate
plaintiff
move
forum
relevant
unrelated
prior
litigation
thus
plaintiffs
desire
kansas
law
manifested
participation
kansas
lawsuit
bears
little
relevance
kansas
opinion
case
expressed
view
reason
fact
adjudicating
nationwide
class
action
much
greater
latitude
applying
law
transactions
question
might
otherwise
case
general
rule
law
forum
applies
unless
expressly
shown
different
law
governs
case
doubt
law
forum
preferred
state
determines
jurisdiction
nationwide
class
action
procedural
due
process
guarantees
notice
adequate
representation
present
believe
law
forum
applied
unless
compelling
reasons
exist
applying
different
law
compelling
reasons
exist
require
look
state
laws
determine
rights
parties
involved
lawsuit
kansas
must
significant
contact
significant
aggregation
contacts
claims
asserted
member
plaintiff
class
contacts
creating
state
interests
order
ensure
choice
kansas
law
arbitrary
unfair
allstate
given
kansas
lack
interest
claims
unrelated
state
substantive
conflict
jurisdictions
texas
conclude
application
kansas
law
every
claim
case
sufficiently
arbitrary
unfair
exceed
constitutional
limits
considering
fairness
context
important
element
expectation
parties
see
allstate
supra
opinion
powell
indication
leases
involving
land
royalty
owners
outside
kansas
executed
parties
idea
kansas
law
control
neither
due
process
clause
full
faith
credit
clause
requires
kansas
substitute
laws
applicable
persons
events
within
conflicting
statute
another
state
pacific
employees
ins
industrial
accident
kansas
may
abrogate
rights
parties
beyond
borders
relation
anything
done
done
within
home
ins
dick
supra
kansas
took
view
nationwide
class
action
procedural
due
process
guarantees
notice
adequate
representation
met
law
forum
applied
unless
compelling
reasons
exist
applying
different
law
whatever
practical
reasons
may
commended
rule
kansas
reasons
already
stated
believe
consistent
decisions
make
effort
determine
law
must
apply
various
transactions
involved
lawsuit
reaffirm
observation
allstate
many
situations
state
may
free
apply
one
several
choices
law
constitutional
limitations
laid
cases
allstate
home
ins
dick
supra
must
respected
even
nationwide
class
action
therefore
affirm
judgment
kansas
insofar
upheld
jurisdiction
kansas
courts
plaintiff
class
members
case
reverse
judgment
insofar
held
kansas
law
applicable
transactions
sought
adjudicate
remand
case
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
petitioner
places
emphasis
fact
absent
class
members
might
subject
discovery
counterclaims
costs
petitioner
cites
cases
involving
imposition
upon
plaintiffs
however
convinced
burdens
rarely
imposed
upon
plaintiff
class
members
disposition
issues
best
left
case
presents
concrete
way
holding
today
limited
class
actions
seek
bind
known
plaintiffs
concerning
claims
wholly
predominantly
money
judgments
intimate
view
concerning
types
class
actions
seeking
equitable
relief
course
discussion
personal
jurisdiction
address
class
actions
jurisdiction
asserted
defendant
class
regard
reporter
amendments
federal
rules
civil
procedure
stated
equiring
individuals
affirmatively
request
inclusion
lawsuit
result
freezing
claims
people
especially
small
claims
held
small
people
one
reason
another
ignorance
timidity
unfamiliarity
business
legal
matters
simply
take
affirmative
step
kaplan
continuing
work
civil
committee
amendments
federal
rules
civil
procedure
harv
rev
following
statutes
procedural
rules
permit
opt
notice
types
class
actions
fed
rule
civ
proc
rule
civ
proc
alaska
rule
civ
proc
rule
civ
proc
cal
civ
code
ann
west
consumer
class
action
rule
civ
proc
del
ch
rule
super
rule
civ
proc
rule
civ
proc
idaho
rule
civ
proc
ind
rule
trial
proc
iowa
rule
civ
proc
stat
ann
rule
civ
proc
rule
civ
proc
md
rule
civ
proc
rule
rule
civ
proc
mo
rule
civ
proc
mont
rule
civ
proc
rule
civ
proc
civ
prac
rule
civ
prac
law
mckinney
rule
civ
proc
ohio
rule
civ
proc
okla
tit
supp
rule
civ
proc
ii
rule
civ
proc
rule
civ
proc
rule
civ
proc
rule
wyo
rule
civ
proc
commission
approved
petitioner
price
increases
opinion
nos
petitioner
reimbursed
royalty
owners
million
suspended
royalties
respectively
leases
located
resident
plaintiffs
follows
opinion
royalty
leases
royalties
owners
state
state
leases
state
opinion
royalty
leases
royalties
owners
state
state
leases
state
opinion
royalty
leases
royalties
owners
state
state
leases
state
kansas
interest
rate
also
conflicts
rate
applicable
louisiana
time
suit
filed
rate
see
la
civ
code
art
amended
wurzlow
placid
oil
la
app
applying
art
oil
gas
royalties
case
kansas
held
trial
determine
whether
difference
existed
laws
kansas
whether
another
state
law
applied
respondents
contend
trial
actually
incorporated
reference
opinion
shutts
executor
looked
texas
oklahoma
interest
rate
statutes
found
inapplicable
think
kansas
fully
adopted
discussion
shutts
executor
holding
case
even
agreed
shutts
executor
somehow
incorporated
insufficient
shutts
executor
case
involving
rather
present
moreover
gas
region
involved
shutts
executor
primarily
within
kansas
borders
shutts
executor
considered
conflict
involving
interest
rate
liability
state
statutes
finding
texas
rate
inapplicable
cited
follow
contrary
texas
precedent
justice
stevens
concurring
part
dissenting
part
reasons
stated
parts
ii
opinion
agree
kansas
courts
properly
exercised
jurisdiction
class
action
also
recognize
use
word
compelling
portion
kansas
opinion
read
context
may
create
inaccurate
impression
holding
see
ante
job
however
review
judgments
edit
opinions
firmly
convinced
constitutional
defect
judgment
review
recognizes
constitutional
injury
applying
kansas
law
conflict
jurisdiction
connected
suit
ante
fair
reading
kansas
opinion
light
earlier
opinion
shutts
phillips
petroleum
hereinafter
shutts
cert
denied
reveals
kansas
examined
laws
connected
jurisdictions
correctly
concluded
direct
substantive
conflict
law
applied
kansas
laws
cf
ante
kansas
merely
developed
general
principles
accommodate
novel
facts
litigation
state
courts
either
agree
kansas
yet
addressed
precisely
similar
claims
consequently
conclude
full
faith
credit
clause
constitution
require
kansas
apply
law
state
fourteenth
amendment
due
process
clause
prevent
kansas
applying
law
case
errs
today
applies
loose
definition
sort
conflict
laws
required
state
constitutional
claim
allowing
phillips
tactical
victory
merely
allegations
putative
likely
conflicts
ante
analysis
also
treats
two
relevant
constitutional
provisions
though
imposed
constraints
forum
view
however
potential
impact
kansas
choice
interests
sovereign
fairness
decision
litigants
separately
considered
see
allstate
insurance
hague
stevens
concurring
judgment
inquiries
essential
better
understanding
merits
underlying
dispute
gleaned
opinion
therefore
begin
explanation
background
litigation
petitioner
phillips
large
independent
producer
purchaser
seller
natural
gas
beginning
prices
sold
natural
gas
interstate
pipeline
companies
regulated
federal
power
commission
commission
phillips
petroleum
wisconsin
party
large
number
producing
oil
gas
leases
phillips
obligated
pay
percentage
value
production
usually
persons
owning
interest
leased
areas
royalty
owners
royalty
owners
due
monthly
royalties
contractual
agreements
made
directly
phillips
see
shutts
supra
others
due
royalties
contracts
made
gas
producers
sell
gas
phillips
separate
contract
producers
phillips
assumed
producer
responsibility
distribute
royalties
royalty
owners
relationship
phillips
royalty
owners
regulated
commission
although
course
materially
affected
commission
control
pricing
relationship
phillips
customers
series
orders
entered
commission
established
practice
suspending
price
increases
proposed
phillips
approved
commission
allowing
phillips
collect
higher
proposed
prices
upon
filing
phillips
commission
corporate
undertaking
refund
customers
portion
increase
ultimately
disapproved
commission
pursuant
commission
regulation
phillips
agrees
unapproved
prices
collects
subject
refund
interest
seven
percent
per
annum
date
receipt
september
eight
percent
per
annum
thereafter
paid
fpc
approve
sales
price
shutts
supra
emphasis
deleted
citing
cfr
commission
opinion
phillips
receipts
periods
proposed
price
increases
yet
received
final
approval
therefore
include
two
components
firm
proceeds
fpc
suspense
money
example
increase
price
cents
per
mcf
thousand
cubic
feet
cents
consideration
collection
higher
price
include
firm
proceeds
cents
cents
fpc
suspense
money
july
price
increase
applicable
tristate
area
kansas
oklahoma
texas
pending
phillips
sent
notice
royalty
owners
area
advising
notice
paid
royalties
basis
firm
proceeds
royalties
based
suspense
money
paid
determined
sums
collected
longer
subject
refund
notice
also
advised
royalty
owners
receive
ongoing
payment
royalties
suspense
money
well
furnished
phillips
acceptable
indemnity
cover
proportionate
part
required
refunds
plus
required
interest
shutts
emphasis
added
indemnity
phillips
required
corporate
security
bond
covering
principal
amount
based
estimated
production
period
plus
interest
rate
phillips
required
pay
customers
price
increase
approved
royalty
owners
provided
phillips
indemnity
approximately
royalty
owners
receive
royalties
suspense
proceeds
years
later
price
increase
finally
approved
situation
succinctly
summarized
kansas
shutts
june
october
phillips
deposited
increased
rate
monies
collected
general
account
commingled
funds
without
ever
giving
notice
fact
royalty
owners
time
holding
money
important
note
period
time
phillips
entitlement
gas
royalty
owners
share
suspense
royalties
whether
rates
approved
fpc
phillips
never
owned
money
phillips
collected
increased
rates
condition
increase
attributable
royalty
owners
ever
go
phillips
royalty
share
according
eventual
fpc
ruling
either
go
phillips
royalty
owners
back
phillips
gas
purchasers
interest
part
one
part
emphasis
original
foregoing
facts
gave
rise
shutts
case
shutts
ii
involves
suspense
royalties
due
similar
price
increases
approved
larger
number
royalty
owners
interests
leased
areas
located
including
kansas
otherwise
however
ith
exceptions
case
similar
legal
issues
factual
situation
presented
shutts
cases
involve
kansas
characterized
common
fund
consisting
suspense
royalties
undeniably
owed
phillips
paid
periods
several
years
commission
approval
rate
increases
pending
undisputed
phillips
enjoyed
unfettered
use
money
see
testimony
phillips
treasurer
also
undisputed
commission
proceedings
ended
none
money
retained
phillips
extent
price
increase
disapproved
refund
purchasing
pipelines
plus
interest
rate
set
commission
required
extent
increases
approved
money
contractually
owned
royalty
owners
kansas
noted
significant
gas
royalty
suspense
monies
never
belong
phillips
ibid
emphasis
deleted
shutts
kansas
held
general
equitable
principles
required
award
interest
royalties
owned
royalty
owners
used
phillips
number
years
support
conclusion
relied
general
statements
two
kansas
cases
long
line
federal
cases
applying
texas
law
concluding
equity
requires
award
interest
suspense
royalties
similar
circumstances
noted
oklahoma
decisions
allowing
interest
suspense
royalties
concluded
several
oklahoma
decisions
hold
interest
may
awarded
equitable
grounds
necessary
arrive
fair
compensation
smith
owens
first
nat
bank
exchange
nat
bank
app
finally
construed
royalty
agreements
issue
containing
contractual
obligation
pay
interest
royalties
period
time
suspense
money
held
used
phillips
thus
kansas
also
found
result
consistent
texas
decision
point
stahl
petroleum
phillips
petroleum
tex
civ
app
awarded
interest
suspended
royalties
based
terms
royalty
agreement
rather
unjust
enrichment
significantly
texas
subsequently
affirmed
stahl
judgment
relied
kansas
decision
shutts
decide
equity
well
contract
law
requires
interest
suspense
royalties
phillips
petroleum
stahl
petroleum
determining
phillips
liable
interest
suspense
royalties
reversed
trial
decision
rate
statutory
interest
rate
kansas
oklahoma
texas
kansas
noted
statutory
rate
three
expressly
applied
rate
agreed
upon
case
phillips
made
express
agreement
evidenced
corporate
undertaking
pay
interest
rate
set
commission
suspense
moneys
found
refundable
kansas
therefore
declined
apply
state
interest
statute
including
quitable
principles
require
contractual
principles
dictate
royalty
owners
receive
treatment
refunded
purchasers
payment
fpc
rate
interest
finally
kansas
rejected
phillips
contention
royalty
owners
waived
claims
interest
accepting
payment
royalties
later
failing
post
indemnity
acceptable
phillips
order
receive
contemporaneous
payment
suspense
royalties
noted
conditions
imposed
phillips
far
stringent
corporate
undertaking
phillips
filed
fpc
concluded
apparent
phillips
previous
imposition
burdensome
conditions
upon
royalty
owners
designed
accomplish
precisely
facts
disclose
virtually
none
royalty
owners
complied
conditions
thereby
leaving
suspense
royalties
hands
phillips
stakeholder
use
pleasure
found
rule
payment
principal
sum
legal
bar
subsequent
action
interest
inapplicable
facts
instead
payment
royalties
due
plaintiff
class
members
instead
extinguishing
debt
constituted
partial
payment
debt
situation
invokes
application
rule
provides
applying
partial
payments
debt
due
absence
agreement
statute
contrary
payment
first
applied
interest
due
ibid
shutts
ii
case
review
kansas
adopted
earlier
analysis
shutts
without
repeating
although
larger
class
involved
shutts
legal
issues
presented
substantially
issues
complex
thoroughly
reviewed
shutts
noting
phillips
satisfactorily
established
apply
rule
enunciated
shutts
kansas
went
state
jurisdiction
nationwide
class
action
properly
asserted
law
forum
applied
unless
compelling
reasons
exist
applying
different
law
ii
course
concern
substantive
merits
decisions
reached
state
courts
faithfully
applying
law
law
another
state
application
purely
state
law
issue
power
delegated
us
restraint
unconstitutional
action
correction
alleged
errors
committed
judiciary
commercial
bank
cincinnati
buckingham
executors
constitution
expressly
mandate
particular
correct
choices
law
rather
state
choice
law
invoke
constitutional
protections
hence
jurisdiction
contravenes
explicit
constitutional
limitation
thus
long
settled
mere
misconstruction
forum
laws
sister
state
violation
full
faith
credit
clause
carroll
lanza
frankfurter
dissenting
clause
requires
accord
full
faith
credit
laws
acknowledge
validity
finality
laws
attempt
good
faith
apply
necessary
applied
home
state
courts
justice
holmes
explained
nothing
suggest
one
state
candidly
construing
another
state
law
best
ability
even
wrong
something
error
construction
necessary
invoke
constitution
pennsylvania
fire
ins
gold
issue
mining
milling
merely
state
general
principles
refute
argument
kansas
decision
violated
full
faith
credit
clause
opinion
shutts
indicates
kansas
made
careful
survey
relevant
laws
oklahoma
texas
whose
law
proffered
relevant
litigation
acknowledges
ante
state
laws
judicial
decisions
precisely
point
kansas
judgment
roughly
analogous
texas
oklahoma
cases
supported
results
kansas
reached
kansas
expressly
declared
multistate
action
also
give
careful
consideration
attempted
possible
conflict
law
problems
judge
might
disagree
substantive
legal
determinations
made
kansas
although
nothing
opinion
seems
erroneous
approach
possible
choices
law
evinces
precisely
full
faith
credit
constitution
requires
imaginable
even
review
another
state
law
might
still
unjustifiably
infring
upon
legitimate
interests
another
state
violate
full
faith
credit
clause
allstate
stevens
concurring
judgment
example
texas
oil
company
texas
royalty
owner
interest
texas
lease
treated
directly
contrary
stated
policy
state
texas
kansas
honest
blunder
constitution
might
bar
parochial
entrenchment
texas
interests
thomas
washington
gas
light
plurality
opinion
case
distant
situation
need
pursue
theoretical
possibility
even
phillips
contend
stated
policies
plainly
contravened
discussion
founded
merely
absence
reported
decisions
speculation
oklahoma
texas
courts
might
likely
case
like
ante
simply
demonstration
kansas
decision
impaired
legitimate
interests
infringed
sovereignty
slightest
iii
nevertheless
possible
state
choice
law
violate
constitution
totally
arbitrary
fundamentally
unfair
litigant
violates
due
process
clause
allstate
stevens
concurring
judgment
forum
connection
lawsuit
jurisdiction
parties
decision
apply
forum
state
law
might
frustrat
justifiable
expectations
parties
unconstitutional
however
constitutional
claim
unfair
surprise
based
merely
upon
unexpected
choice
particular
state
law
must
rest
persuasive
showing
unexpected
result
arrived
application
law
thus
absent
conflict
laws
terms
results
produce
due
process
clause
simply
violated
underlying
theory
due
process
claim
must
parties
plan
conduct
contractual
relations
based
upon
legitimate
expectations
concerning
subsequent
legal
consequences
actions
example
might
base
decision
belief
law
particular
state
govern
change
state
law
interim
execution
performance
contract
violate
due
process
clause
constitution
violated
simply
state
made
unanticipated
ruling
previously
unanswered
question
law
perhaps
question
case
perfectly
clear
due
process
violation
classic
false
conflicts
case
phillips
demonstrated
significant
conflicts
exist
merely
oklahoma
texas
state
case
law
silent
concerning
equitable
theories
developed
kansas
courts
litigation
even
language
oklahoma
texas
statutes
suggests
likely
reach
different
results
ante
heavy
reliance
characterization
law
provided
phillips
adequate
substitute
neutral
review
ante
petitioner
claims
petitioner
shows
petitioner
points
petitioner
also
points
unmistakable
review
shutts
kansas
examined
laws
cited
today
indicative
direct
conflicts
construed
supportive
kansas
result
precedents
say
nothing
constitution
statutory
jurisdiction
review
judgments
permit
substantive
judgments
moreover
independent
examination
demonstrates
solid
support
kansas
conclusions
crux
disagreement
standard
applied
evaluate
sufficiency
allegations
conflicts
necessary
support
constitutional
claim
rather
potential
putative
even
likely
conflicts
require
demonstration
unambiguous
conflict
established
law
another
state
essential
element
constitutional
claim
arguments
state
merely
applied
general
principles
novel
manner
reconciled
arguably
conflicting
laws
erroneously
face
unprecedented
factual
circumstances
suffice
make
constitutional
issue
case
kansas
application
general
principles
equity
interpretation
agreements
reliance
commission
regulations
construction
general
statutory
terms
contravened
established
legal
principles
consequently
characterized
either
arbitrary
fundamentally
unfair
phillips
therefore
find
due
process
violation
kansas
decision
iv
final
analysis
today
may
merely
expressing
disagreement
kansas
statement
nationwide
class
action
law
forum
applied
unless
compelling
reasons
exist
applying
different
law
considering
statement
background
kansas
careful
analysis
shutts
however
confident
agree
every
state
obligation
full
faith
credit
clause
respect
legitimate
interests
avoid
infringement
upon
sovereignty
allstate
stevens
concurring
judgment
see
nevada
hall
also
agreed
fact
decision
may
unsound
necessarily
implicate
federal
concerns
embodied
full
faith
credit
clause
allstate
stevens
concurring
judgment
see
ante
many
situations
state
may
free
apply
one
several
choices
law
allstate
plurality
opinion
suit
involves
claims
connected
forum
state
constitution
requires
relevant
laws
brought
attention
forum
examined
fairly
prior
making
choice
law
reviews
judgments
opinions
chevron
natural
resources
defense
council
criticism
portion
kansas
opinion
taken
context
provides
insufficient
basis
reversing
judgment
unless
actual
choice
kansas
law
violated
substantial
constitutional
rights
parties
see
power
review
judgments
state
law
including
state
law
choice
law
extend
reversal
based
disagreement
law
application
review
record
underlying
litigation
convincingly
demonstrates
despite
phillips
protestations
regarding
kansas
development
principles
disregard
laws
unfair
application
kansas
law
litigants
occurred
phillips
constitutional
right
avoid
judgment
kansas
might
convinced
another
state
develop
law
differently
believe
engage
detailed
evaluations
various
laws
contrary
believe
limited
jurisdiction
review
judgments
foreclose
review
accordingly
trust
today
decision
momentary
aberration
opinion
read
decision
constitutionalize
novel
developments
common
law
whenever
litigant
claim
another
state
connected
litigation
likely
reach
different
result
long
ago
decided
choices
law
unreviewable
absent
demonstration
unambiguous
conflict
established
laws
connected
see
supra
hold
otherwise
render
possible
bring
every
case
wherein
defeated
party
claimed
statute
another
state
construed
detriment
johnson
new
york
life
ins
ignored
admonition
today
may
forced
renew
efforts
convince
bar
judgments
based
fair
evaluations
laws
final
accordingly
join
parts
ii
opinion
respectfully
dissent
part
iii
judgment
full
faith
credit
shall
given
state
public
acts
records
judicial
proceedings
every
state
congress
may
general
laws
prescribe
manner
acts
records
proceedings
shall
proved
effect
thereof
art
iv
see
also
state
shall
deprive
person
life
liberty
property
without
due
process
law
amdt
responsibilities
federal
power
commission
transferred
federal
energy
regulatory
commission
see
stat
relevant
portion
notice
provided
full
effective
june
notice
royalties
paid
computed
excluding
portion
price
collected
subject
refund
exceeds
cents
per
mcf
presently
maximum
area
price
level
increased
rates
recently
announced
federal
power
commission
statement
general
policy
payment
royalty
based
balance
sums
collected
made
time
determined
sums
collected
longer
subject
refund
interest
owners
desiring
receive
payments
computed
currently
full
sums
collected
may
arrange
furnishing
phillips
petroleum
company
acceptable
indemnity
cover
proportionate
part
required
refunds
plus
required
interest
shutts
phillips
put
suspense
royalties
common
trust
fund
separate
operating
funds
used
solely
pay
either
pipeline
companies
gas
royalty
owners
fpc
ultimately
decided
rate
increase
question
case
dovetail
nicely
common
fund
cases
shutts
accord
criticizes
kansas
use
common
fund
concept
applied
funds
ante
kansas
alone
however
applying
common
fund
concept
class
action
pool
readily
identifiable
moneys
placed
within
power
liability
determined
lawsuit
see
perlman
first
national
bank
chicago
app
cited
shutts
see
also
sprague
ticonic
national
bank
common
fund
may
recovered
litigation
dawson
lawyers
involuntary
clients
attorney
fees
funds
harv
rev
funds
also
created
litigation
moreover
course
concern
kansas
chooses
develop
state
doctrines
absent
constitutional
foundation
plainly
lacking
criticism
kansas
substantive
state
law
entirely
gratuitous
phillips
argued
distinction
made
purposes
interest
liability
royalties
owed
gas
sold
pipeline
companies
paid
higher
suspense
price
royalties
owned
gas
used
phillips
rather
sold
yet
phillips
acknowledges
obligation
pay
royalties
various
contracts
exists
without
regard
actual
disposition
gas
emphasis
added
thus
choosing
withhold
payment
phillips
allowed
use
suspense
monies
suspense
period
rightfully
belonged
royalty
owners
royalty
owners
turn
deprived
receiving
using
monies
time
applying
unjust
enrichment
theory
developed
shutts
kansas
accordingly
rejected
phillips
proffered
distinction
significantly
phillips
claim
even
putative
conflict
laws
might
turn
distinction
phillips
pursues
argument
contend
never
actually
collected
higher
prices
gas
used
fund
actually
existed
brief
petitioner
kansas
noted
however
fund
issue
easily
computed
amount
royalties
due
royalty
owners
case
moneys
collected
phillips
return
sales
lightcap
mobil
oil
cert
denied
shapiro
kansas
public
employees
retirement
system
cited
six
cases
four
fifth
circuit
two
northern
district
texas
phillips
named
party
kansas
also
pointed
noted
imposition
interest
refunds
ordered
fpc
inappropriate
means
preventing
unjust
enrichment
gas
callery
properties
see
stat
ann
creditors
shall
allowed
receive
interest
rate
six
percent
per
annum
rate
interest
agreed
upon
okla
tit
legal
rate
interest
shall
six
per
cent
absence
contract
rate
interest
tex
rev
civ
stat
art
vernon
specified
rate
interest
agreed
upon
parties
interest
rate
per
annum
shall
allowed
emphasis
added
also
held
interest
accruing
entry
judgment
determined
kansas
postjudgment
interest
statute
stat
ann
phillips
contend
constitution
bars
kansas
applying
kansas
postjudgment
interest
statute
judgments
entered
kansas
courts
statutes
demonstrate
irrefutable
state
interest
force
carried
judgments
entered
state
courts
see
also
klaxon
stentor
electric
mfg
state
interest
statutes
concern
incidental
item
damages
interest
respect
courts
forum
commonly
free
apply
law
see
fit
noted
rule
also
followed
oklahoma
texas
phillips
raised
lost
contention
waiver
similar
case
texas
citing
phillips
petroleum
riverview
gas
compression
supp
nd
tex
moreover
relevant
oklahoma
statute
expressly
stated
payment
principal
sum
must
accepted
support
finding
waiver
okla
tit
statute
inapplicable
inasmuch
royalty
payments
accepted
apparently
new
argument
raised
phillips
shutts
ii
liable
interest
subclass
affected
royalty
owners
whose
direct
contractual
agreement
royalties
producers
sold
gas
phillips
separate
agreement
although
phillips
assumed
obligation
pay
royalties
directly
royalty
owners
separate
agreements
separate
agreements
also
stated
suspended
price
increase
ultimately
approved
commission
phillips
pay
producers
additional
money
without
interest
phillips
argued
without
interest
clause
barred
interest
royalty
owners
well
producers
kansas
rejected
argument
however
royalty
owners
parties
separate
agreements
consideration
paid
royalty
owners
phillips
return
purported
waiver
interest
hese
provisions
entered
phillips
producers
unilaterally
deprive
royalty
owners
interest
otherwise
entitled
receive
casing
head
gas
contracts
provisions
appear
ibid
see
final
judgments
decrees
rendered
highest
state
may
reviewed
writ
certiorari
title
right
privilege
immunity
specially
set
claimed
constitution
emphasis
added
principle
settled
number
cases
decided
either
side
turn
century
see
pennsylvania
fire
ins
gold
issue
mining
milling
western
life
indemnity
rupp
louisville
nashville
melton
allen
alleghany
johnson
new
york
life
ins
glenn
garth
cf
guaranty
trust
new
york
federal
courts
apply
state
law
furtherance
goal
outcome
litigation
federal
substantially
tried
state
kansas
also
stated
kansas
statutory
requirements
fulfilled
liability
determined
according
varying
inconsistent
state
laws
belies
notion
kansas
plans
ante
decisions
onto
assertion
jurisdiction
multistate
actions
precisely
opposite
suggested
noted
allstate
however
litigant
challenging
choice
law
clearly
bears
burden
establishing
constitutional
infringement
prima
facie
every
state
entitled
enforce
courts
statutes
one
challenges
right
assumes
burden
showing
upon
rational
basis
conflicting
interests
involved
foreign
state
superior
forum
alaska
packers
assn
industrial
accident
see
western
life
indemnity
rupp
appear
attention
called
decision
courts
illinois
placing
different
construction
indeed
construction
upon
section
question
decision
existed
incumbent
upon
defendant
prove
thus
litigant
failed
call
state
attention
relevant
law
jurisdictions
raise
law
create
constitutional
issue
noted
allstate
choice
forum
law
might
also
violate
due
process
clause
ways
irrationally
favoring
residents
nonresidents
representing
dramatic
departure
rule
obtains
american
jurisdictions
first
possibility
applicable
royalty
owners
treated
exactly
alike
kansas
analysis
second
possibility
dramatic
departure
must
distinguished
application
general
equitable
principles
address
new
situations
phillips
may
criticize
kansas
allegedly
unique
notions
contract
oil
gas
law
brief
petitioner
constitutional
objection
state
courts
like
constantly
must
apply
develop
general
legal
principles
accommodate
novel
factual
circumstances
overarching
goal
achieving
result
today
decision
example
newly
establishes
lawful
jurisdiction
multistate
plaintiffs
class
action
phillips
likely
anticipated
years
ago
absent
demonstration
departure
clear
rule
obtaining
argument
merely
state
ever
hinted
kansas
result
unavailing
alse
conflict
really
means
conflict
laws
laws
relevant
set
facts
produce
decision
lawsuit
real
conflict
leflar
american
conflicts
law
ed
see
also
scoles
hay
conflict
laws
false
conflict
exists
potentially
applicable
laws
differ
absence
direct
conflicts
distinguishes
case
decisions
home
ins
dick
john
hancock
mutual
life
ins
yates
interstate
legal
conflicts
clear
conceded
dispositive
shutts
ii
kansas
noted
legal
issues
presented
substantially
shutts
hile
issues
complex
thoroughly
reviewed
shutts
addressed
award
rate
interest
damages
compensate
plaintiffs
unjust
enrichment
derived
phillips
use
plaintiffs
money
concluded
instant
case
phillips
satisfactorily
established
apply
rule
enunciated
shutts
respecting
claim
two
sentences
later
paragraph
made
broad
statement
forum
law
apply
absent
compelling
reason
fair
reading
statement
context
kansas
shutts
ii
adopted
multistate
survey
performed
shutts
properly
placed
burden
phillips
see
supra
show
shutts
conclusions
reexamined
even
ambiguous
give
kansas
benefit
doubt
reviewing
judgment
thus
frankly
understand
summary
rejection
attempt
incorporate
shutts
ante
implication
discussion
shutts
may
erroneous
merits
statement
kansas
follow
contrary
texas
precedent
emphasis
added
simply
wrong
see
infra
provides
list
putative
conflicts
ante
errors
omissions
apparent
discussion
demonstrate
dangers
relying
characterizations
state
law
provided
interested
party
although
technically
may
recorded
oklahoma
decision
dealing
interest
liability
suspended
royalties
ante
emphasis
added
oklahoma
law
expressly
provides
damages
caused
breach
obligation
pay
money
deemed
amount
due
terms
obligation
interest
thereon
okla
tit
emphasis
added
see
also
person
entitled
recover
damages
certain
capable
made
certain
calculation
entitled
also
recover
interest
thereon
oklahoma
specifically
held
oil
field
royalty
owners
may
sue
class
recover
royalties
due
may
recover
interest
amount
recovery
west
edmond
hunton
line
unit
young
authority
string
citation
regarding
oklahoma
statutory
interest
rate
supports
statement
oklahoma
likely
impose
rate
suit
ante
constitutional
statutory
provisions
merely
provide
absence
contract
rate
indeed
stat
tit
cited
judicial
decisions
merely
hold
interest
recoverable
certain
obligations
including
royalties
due
oil
field
royalty
owners
without
discussing
applicable
limitations
rate
examining
oklahoma
authorities
kansas
found
oklahoma
statutory
rate
well
texas
kansas
inapplicable
terms
phillips
contractually
agreed
higher
federal
rate
reported
oklahoma
decision
contradicts
judgment
express
terms
oklahoma
statute
permit
see
also
mcanally
ideal
federal
credit
union
federal
law
provides
interest
excess
per
year
rate
must
govern
oklahoma
statutory
rate
kansas
similarly
reviewed
texas
interest
statute
found
phillips
contractual
agreement
fpc
rate
rendered
statute
inapplicable
true
texas
awarded
suspense
royalty
interest
rate
higher
equally
plain
cited
cases
higher
rate
sought
texas
courts
however
specifically
permitted
recovery
higher
rates
contract
even
implied
oral
contract
evidences
agreement
rates
preston
farm
ranch
supply
enterprises
tex
moody
main
bank
houston
tex
app
noting
phillips
reliance
oklahoma
statute
stating
accepting
payment
whole
principal
waives
claim
interest
stat
tit
demonstrates
statute
application
open
question
citing
cf
webster
drilling
sterling
oil
case
oklahoma
held
right
interest
based
upon
contract
interest
become
substantive
part
debt
title
applicable
citation
omitted
claim
interest
upheld
webster
drilling
based
implied
contract
exactly
kansas
found
shutts
kansas
explicitly
considered
title
relied
webster
drilling
find
inapplicable
therefore
impossible
suggest
kansas
ignor
ed
oklahoma
statute
ante
finally
plainly
misconstrues
texas
law
suggesting
mere
offer
pay
suspended
royalties
return
indemnity
agreement
excuse
interest
federal
decision
cited
mentions
texas
cases
relevant
pages
phillips
petroleum
riverside
gas
indemnity
agreements
actually
entered
fifth
circuit
case
relied
authority
cite
texas
cases
unconditional
offer
give
possession
disputed
fund
necessary
bar
interest
created
phillips
petroleum
adams
emphasis
added
texas
subsequently
agreed
adams
correctly
stated
texas
law
phillips
petroleum
stahl
petroleum
see
also
fuller
phillips
petroleum
supp
nd
tex
entering
indemnity
agreement
terminates
interest
liability
phillips
lost
reasonably
free
use
money
indemnity
agreements
entered
plaintiffs
however
kansas
found
phillips
indemnity
offer
unconditional
contrary
far
stringent
corporate
undertaking
phillips
filed
fpc
also
uncontested
phillips
continued
use
freely
unpaid
suspense
royalties
long
burdensome
conditions
accepted
royalty
owners
errs
drastically
relying
one
federal
district
appears
held
sustain
constitutional
claim
fact
kansas
rejected
state
statute
favor
uniform
federal
interest
rate
found
phillips
contractually
agreed
demonstrates
absence
parochialism
decision
absolutely
indication
texas
oklahoma
courts
decided
differently
claim
presented
neither
phillips
contends
kansas
constitutionally
apply
laws
claims
kansas
residents
even
though
leased
land
may
lie
apparent
connection
kansas
may
exist
phillips
done
business
kansas
throughout
years
relevant
litigation
seems
unarguable
application
kansas
law
indeed
law
royalty
owners
reside
claims
least
plaintiff
class
members
thus
perceived
possible
phillips
time
contracting
allstate
stevens
concurring
judgment
see
also
possible
course
number
royalty
owners
might
moved
kansas
years
phillips
held
suspense
royalties
kansas
substantial
interest
seeing
residents
treated
fairly
invoke
jurisdiction
courts
see
weinberg
conflicts
cases
problem
relevant
time
hofstra
rev
phillips
must
anticipated
application
kansas
law
claims
eventual
geographic
distribution
royalty
owners
residences
goes
likelihood
fairness
application
kansas
law
allstate
stevens
concurring
judgment
additionally
easy
enough
national
firms
like
phillips
make
clear
expectations
placing
express
clauses
contracts
see
allstate
stevens
concurring
judgment
clay
sun
ins
office
clauses
present
however
see
allstate
stevens
concurring
judgment
omitted
question
whether
judge
decision
apply
law
state
ever
described
wholly
irrational
judges
presumably
familiar
state
law
may
find
difficult
time
consuming
discover
apply
correctly
law
another
state
forum
state
interest
fair
efficient
administration
justice
therefore
sufficient
judgment
attach
presumption
validity
forum
state
decision
apply
law
dispute
jurisdiction
accord
newberg
newberg
class
actions
ed
kansas
shutts
ii
may
committed
harmless
error
applying
law
appears
significant
conflict
laws
among
involved
decision
allstate
criticized
ground
may
well
true
conflict
laws
present
therefore
need
extended
constitutional
discussion
see
weintraub
afraid
constitutional
limitations
choice
law
hofstra
rev
demonstrated
open
criticism
indeed
unless
review
restricted
cases
conflicts
unambiguous
constantly
run
risk
misconstruing
common
law
number
example
kansas
already
decided
oklahoma
apply
statutory
interest
rates
evidence
contractual
agreement
different
rate
agreement
present
yet
today
speculates
oklahoma
likely
apply
statutory
rates
lawsuit
ante
since
authority
resolve
issues
oklahoma
law
kansas
however
latter
remains
free
abide
former
judgment