DuPont 2007 Annual Report Download - page 84

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 84 of the 2007 DuPont annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 108

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108

Asset Retirement Obligations
The company has recorded asset retirement obligations primarily associated with closure, reclamation and removal
costs for mining operations related to the production of titanium dioxide in Coatings & Color Technologies. The
company’s asset retirement obligation liabilities were $62 at December 31, 2007 and 2006.
Litigation
Benlate»
In 1991, DuPont began receiving claims by growers that use of Benlate»50 DF fungicide had caused crop damage.
DuPont has since been served with thousands of lawsuits, most of which have been disposed of through trial,
dismissal or settlement. The status of Benlate»cases is indicated in the table below:
Number
of Cases
Balance at January 1, 2005 93
Filed -
Resolved (30)
Balance at December 31, 2005 63
Filed -
Resolved (3)
Balance at December 31, 2006 60
Reinstated 2
Resolved (48)
Balance at December 31, 2007 14
At December 31, 2007, there were nine cases pending in Florida state court, involving allegations that Benlate»
caused crop damage. Plaintiffs appealed the court’s 2006 dismissal of one of the nine cases for failure to prosecute.
Two of the nine cases, involving twenty-seven Costa Rican fern growers, were tried during the second quarter of
2006 resulting in a $56 judgment against the company, which was reduced to $24 on DuPont’s motion. At trial, the
plaintiffs sought damages in the range of $270 to $400. The plaintiffs and DuPont have appealed the verdict. DuPont
believes that the appeal will be resolved in its favor and, therefore, has not established a reserve relating to the
judgment.
At December 31, 2007, there was one case pending in Florida and one in Hawaii in which the plaintiffs seek to reopen
settlements with the company by alleging that it committed fraud and misconduct, as well as violations of federal and
state racketeering laws. In October 2007, the appeals court entered an order precluding the judge from taking further
action effectively dismissing the case pending in Florida. Plaintiffs are seeking a discretionary review by the Florida
Supreme Court. In 2005, the case pending in Hawaii was settled in part for $1.2. In November 2007, the Hawaii
Supreme Court affirmed the state court’s dismissal of the remainder of the case. However, plaintiffs may seek review
by the U.S. Supreme Court. During the second quarter 2007, the company settled five cases that were pending in
Hawaii for $8.5. During the first quarter 2007, the dismissal of the sixteen reopener cases pending in Florida was
affirmed and the cases were closed.
At September 30, 2007, there were two cases pending in Delaware state court, involving allegations that Benlate»
caused birth defects to children exposed in utero. In the fourth quarter 2007, the court approved and finalized the
settlement of $9 with the six plaintiffs in these two cases as well as twenty-six other claimants represented by the
same attorney. DuPont paid the settlement in the fourth quarter 2007 although one parent has appealed the court’s
order approving the settlement in one of the cases. Therefore, at December 31, 2007, one of the cases was still
pending.
At December 31, 2007, there were two shrimp cases in Florida pending against the company. These cases had been
decided in DuPont’s favor, but in September 2007, the judge granted plaintiffs’ motion for new trial thus reinstating
the cases. The company has appealed. The twenty-six other cases involving damage to shrimp pending against the
F-27
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)
(Dollars in millions, except per share)