From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...
Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts
United States Supreme Court
472 U.S. 797 (1985)
Phillips Petroleum Co. (defendant), a producer and seller of natural gas, extracted some of its gas from leased real property in 11 states. Shutts (plaintiff), a royalty owner with rights to the leases from which Phillips produced the gas, brought a class-action suit in a Kansas state court, alleging that the plaintiff class members were owed interest on royalty payments that Phillips had delayed. The trial court certified a class consisting of royalty owners from all 50 states, Washington, D.C., and foreign countries. Shutts sent a letter via first-class mail to each class member. The letter advised each class member that he could appear in person or by counsel, or otherwise, each class member would be represented by Shutts and the other named plaintiffs. The letter also advised each class member that he could opt out of the class if he returned a document included with the notice entitled "request for exclusion.” The final class as certified contained 28,100 members. Approximately 97 percent of the class members and over 99 percent of the leases had no connection to Kansas beyond the lawsuit. After trial, the Kansas court found Phillips liable under Kansas law for interest on the delayed royalty payments. Phillips appealed to the Supreme Court of Kansas. On appeal, Phillips argued that the Kansas court did not have personal jurisdiction over the absent class members and that the opt-out notice was not sufficient to bind class members who were not Kansas residents or did not have minimum contacts with Kansas. Phillips also asserted that the trial court erred in applying Kansas law to all of the claims and that the court instead should have looked to the law of each state where a lease was located to determine whether interest could be recovered and at what rate. The Supreme Court of Kansas affirmed the decision of the trial court. The United States Supreme Court granted Phillips's petition for certiorari.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Stevens, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 603,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.