Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit
E306565
The Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit was a landmark 1980s U.S. civil case in which Pennzoil won a multibillion-dollar judgment against Texaco over interference with its agreement to acquire Getty Oil, reshaping corporate merger practices and tort law.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Pennzoil Co. v. Texaco, Inc. | 1 |
| Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T2862803 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit Context triple: [Texaco, legalIssue, Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit]
-
A.
antitrust case Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States
The antitrust case Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States was a landmark 1911 U.S. Supreme Court decision that broke up John D. Rockefeller’s oil monopoly under the Sherman Antitrust Act, reshaping American corporate and competition law.
-
B.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. is a landmark 1916 New York Court of Appeals case that expanded manufacturers’ liability in negligence to consumers, even without privity of contract.
-
C.
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the limits of First Amendment petitioning rights when parties allegedly use governmental and judicial processes as part of an anticompetitive scheme in violation of antitrust laws.
-
D.
Lucas v. Earl
Lucas v. Earl is a landmark 1930 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that income is taxed to the person who earns it, regardless of contractual arrangements to split or assign that income.
-
E.
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld an Arizona law allowing the state to revoke business licenses of employers who knowingly hire unauthorized immigrants, ruling that it was not preempted by federal immigration law.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit Target entity description: The Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit was a landmark 1980s U.S. civil case in which Pennzoil won a multibillion-dollar judgment against Texaco over interference with its agreement to acquire Getty Oil, reshaping corporate merger practices and tort law.
-
A.
antitrust case Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States
The antitrust case Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States was a landmark 1911 U.S. Supreme Court decision that broke up John D. Rockefeller’s oil monopoly under the Sherman Antitrust Act, reshaping American corporate and competition law.
-
B.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. is a landmark 1916 New York Court of Appeals case that expanded manufacturers’ liability in negligence to consumers, even without privity of contract.
-
C.
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the limits of First Amendment petitioning rights when parties allegedly use governmental and judicial processes as part of an anticompetitive scheme in violation of antitrust laws.
-
D.
Lucas v. Earl
Lucas v. Earl is a landmark 1930 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that income is taxed to the person who earns it, regardless of contractual arrangements to split or assign that income.
-
E.
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld an Arizona law allowing the state to revoke business licenses of employers who knowingly hire unauthorized immigrants, ruling that it was not preempted by federal immigration law.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (51)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States court case
ⓘ
civil lawsuit ⓘ landmark case ⓘ tort case ⓘ |
| allegation |
Texaco induced Getty Oil to breach its agreement with Pennzoil
ⓘ
Texaco interfered with Pennzoil’s agreement to acquire Getty Oil ⓘ |
| compensatoryDamagesAwarded | approximately 7.5 billion U.S. dollars ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| courtOfFirstInstance | District Court of Harris County, Texas ⓘ |
| decade | 1980s ⓘ |
| defendant |
Texaco
ⓘ
surface form:
Texaco Inc.
|
| impact |
encouraged clearer drafting of merger and acquisition agreements
ⓘ
increased attention to letters of intent and memoranda of understanding in M&A ⓘ raised awareness of potential liability for interfering with pending deals ⓘ |
| industryContext | petroleum industry ⓘ |
| involves |
Getty Oil acquisition
ⓘ
corporate mergers and acquisitions ⓘ oil industry ⓘ |
| judgmentAgainst |
Texaco
ⓘ
surface form:
Texaco Inc.
|
| judgmentAmount | over 10 billion U.S. dollars including interest and punitive damages ⓘ |
| judgmentFor | Pennzoil Company ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
Texas
ⓘ
surface form:
State of Texas
United States of America ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| legalClaimAgainst |
Texaco
ⓘ
surface form:
Texaco Inc.
|
| legalClaimBy | Pennzoil Company ⓘ |
| legalField |
business torts
ⓘ
contract law ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
breach of contract (alleged underlying agreement)
ⓘ
tortious interference with contract ⓘ tortious interference with prospective business relations ⓘ |
| partyRole |
Pennzoil as would-be acquirer of Getty Oil
ⓘ
Texaco as competing bidder for Getty Oil ⓘ |
| plaintiff | Pennzoil Company ⓘ |
| punitiveDamagesAwarded | approximately 3 billion U.S. dollars ⓘ |
| relatedTo |
corporate governance
ⓘ
mergers and acquisitions law ⓘ securities law practice ⓘ |
| resolution | eventual settlement between Pennzoil and Texaco ⓘ |
| result | jury verdict in favor of Pennzoil ⓘ |
| settlementAmount | approximately 3 billion U.S. dollars paid by Texaco to Pennzoil ⓘ |
| significance |
highlighted enforceability of preliminary merger agreements
ⓘ
influenced U.S. tort law on interference with contracts ⓘ one of the largest civil judgments in U.S. history at the time ⓘ reshaped corporate merger practices ⓘ |
| subjectOf |
Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Pennzoil Co. v. Texaco, Inc.
|
| subsequentEvent | Texaco filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 1987 ⓘ |
| thirdParty | Getty Oil Company ⓘ |
| timePeriod | 1980s ⓘ |
| trialLocation |
Houston, Texas, United States
ⓘ
surface form:
Houston, Texas
|
| underlyingTransaction | proposed acquisition of Getty Oil by Pennzoil ⓘ |
| yearOfVerdict | 1985 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit Description of subject: The Pennzoil v. Texaco lawsuit was a landmark 1980s U.S. civil case in which Pennzoil won a multibillion-dollar judgment against Texaco over interference with its agreement to acquire Getty Oil, reshaping corporate merger practices and tort law.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.