Company and Case Information

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Decisions

Settlements

Litigation Activity Indices

Top Ten List

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors


Register


_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School


Torch Offshore, Inc.
Summary: According to the Company’s FORM 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004, the lawsuit was dismissed on December 19, 2002 for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The plaintiffs appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. On July 26, 2004, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit dismissed the case. On August 6, 2004, the plaintiffs appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for a re-hearing, but on August 25, 2004 the re-hearing was denied. A mandate was issued on September 2, 2004 closing the case.

The original Complaint alleges that the defendants violated Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 by making false and misleading representations in the June 7, 2001 Registration Statement and Prospectus (the Prospectus) prepared and disseminated by defendants in connection with the IPO. Plaintiff alleges, among other things, that the Prospectus contained material misrepresentations concerning the prices of natural gas and oil in the period preceding the IPO, as well as the effect of those prices upon the Company's business and the demand for the Company's services.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 1389
Sector: Energy
Industry: Oil Well Services & Equipment


COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: Torch Offshore, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: TORC
COMPANY WEBSITE: http://www.torchinc.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE
Kapps, et al., v. Torch Offshore, Inc., et al.
 COURT: E.D. Louisiana  DOCKET NUMBER: 02-CV-00582
 JUDGE NAME: Hon. Martin L.C. Feldman
 DATE FILED: 03/01/2002  SOURCE: Business Wires
 CLASS PERIOD START: 06/07/2001  CLASS PERIOD END: 08/01/2001
 TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
 PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
  • LeBlanc & Waddell, LLC
      201 St. Charles Avenue, Suite 3204, New Orleans, LA, 70170
       (voice) 504.523.9900, (fax) 504.522.9300,
  • Schatz & Nobel, P.C.
      330 Main Street, Hartford, CT, 06106
       (voice) 800.797.5499, (fax) 860.493.6290, sn06106@AOL.com
    _____________________________________________
     TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS:  2

  •  DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
    Class Action Complaint
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 03/01/2002

    REFERENCE COMPLAINT
    Kapps, et al., v. Torch Offshore, Inc., et al.
     COURT: E.D. Louisiana  DOCKET NUMBER: 02-CV-00582
     JUDGE NAME: Hon. Martin L. Feldman
     DATE FILED: 06/12/2002  SOURCE: Business Wires
     CLASS PERIOD START: 06/07/2001  CLASS PERIOD END: 08/01/2001
     TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated and/or Amended
     PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  • LeBlanc & Waddell, LLC
      201 St. Charles Avenue, Suite 3204, New Orleans, LA, 70170
       (voice) 504.523.9900, (fax) 504.522.9300,
  • Schatz & Nobel, P.C.
      330 Main Street, Hartford, CT, 06106
       (voice) 800.797.5499, (fax) 860.493.6290, sn06106@AOL.com
    _____________________________________________
     TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS:  2

  •  DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
    Order and Reason
    Type: Order Date on the document: 12/19/2002
    Judgment
    Type: Other Date on the document: 01/17/2003
    U.S. District Court Civil Docket
    Type: Docket Date on the document: 09/10/2004

     OTHER DOCUMENTS
    Case Name and/or Number: 
    Type:  Date on the document: 

    WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
    The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.
    Go to Search  page | Go to Case Index  page | Back to Top