Court Opinion

ID: 9767656
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 05:23:05.974723+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:32.287340
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING *
Axelson, Inc. (“Axelson”) and U.S. Industries, Inc. (“USI”) relators, filed a motion for rehearing in this case and asserted that (1) this Court erred in finding that the kickback investigations were unrelated to the Key 1-11 well; and (2) this Court failed to address the specific discovery sought by relators with regard to the dual capacity witnesses.
Addressing relators’ first point on rehearing, we acknowledge that the Key 1-11 well was one of the wells under investigation. After extensive cross-examination by Axelson’s counsel, Albert Perlin, general counsel for Apache Corporation, testified that “[t]he Key well was not excluded from the scope of the investigation; nor was it a direct focusing on the Key well....” Per-lin went on to state that the investigation was not related to the Key well litigation. *179Therefore, the involvement of the Key wells in the kickback investigation does not change our disposition of relators’ fifth mandamus point denying discovery of the kickback investigation materials. Relators’ first point on rehearing is overruled.
We have considered the remaining points and contentions on rehearing and conclude they should be overruled and that we should adhere to our original opinion in this matter. Thus, the relators’ motion for rehearing is overruled.

This case was initially submitted to and determined by a panel of this Court, which consisted of Chief Justice Reynolds and Justices Dodson and Countiss. Justice Countiss resigned from this Court on 7 June 1988 and did not participate in the decision on rehearing.