Newpark Resources, Inc. - Securities Class Action

Company and Case Information

IMPORTANT INFORMATION | INDEX OF FILINGS | SEARCH

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Litigation Activity Indices

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors

Register

_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School

Newpark Resources, Inc. Summary: On October 9, 2007, the Settlement Fairness Hearing was held before Judge Marcel Livaudais. That day, the Court granted the motion for Attorney Fees and Expenses. According to the Order, the Court awards attorneys' fees of 30% of the Settlement Fund and $92,646.89 in expenses. The Court also granted the motion for approval of the Plan of Allocation of settlement proceeds. Lastly, the Court entered the Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice, approving the settlement and dismissing the action with prejudice.

On August 1, 2007 the judge entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement and scheduling a Fairness Hearing for October 9, 2007. Parties entered a Notice of Pendency informing class members of a settlement fund created in the amount of $9,240,000 cash and including any interest that may accrue during the settlement process. The notice also states that plaintiffs' attorneys intend to apply for fees 30% of the settlement and reimbursement of expenses not to exceed $250,000.

According to a press release dated April 13, 2007, Newpark Resources, Inc. announced today that it has reached settlements with the plaintiffs in shareholder class action and derivative litigation. As in all shareholder class and derivative actions, the settlement is subject to court approval. Once approved, the settlements will resolve all class and derivative litigation against the Company, its former and current directors, and former officers. During 2006, several securities class action lawsuits and derivative actions were filed against the Company, certain current and former directors, and former officers of the Company. These actions were commenced following the Company's disclosure of an internal investigation into potential irregularities in the processing and payment of invoices at one of its subsidiaries, Soloco Texas, LP ("Soloco"), and alleged improper granting, recording and accounting of backdated grants of stock options to executives. Newpark Resources, Inc. Under the terms of the settlement, Newpark will pay $1,550,000, and the Company's directors and officers' liability insurance carrier will pay $8,300,000. Both amounts include the cost of certain legal fees and administration costs. As part of the settlement, the Company is preserving certain claims it may have against its former CEO and CFO for matters arising from the potential invoicing irregularities at Soloco and the backdating of options. Newpark will accrue its share of the settlement costs, along with the legal fees incurred to conclude this settlement, in the first quarter of 2007.

As summarized by the Company’s FORM 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, between April 21, 2006 and May 9, 2006, five lawsuits asserting claims against us for violation of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and SEC Rule 10b-5 were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. All five lawsuits have been transferred to Judge Marcel Livaudais who has consolidated these actions as In re: Newpark Resources, Inc. Securities Litigation. Following the filing of the Amendment No. 2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for 2005 (filed on October 10, 2006), the plaintiffs filed (on November 9, 2006) a Consolidated Class Action Complaint for Securities Fraud (the “Consolidated Class Complaint”) against us and [certain] directors and officers. The Consolidated Class Complaint alleges that we and the individual defendants made false and misleading statements in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. These allegations arise from our disclosure of an internal investigation into potential irregularities in the processing and payment of invoices at one of our subsidiaries, Soloco Texas, LP, and alleged improper granting, recording and accounting of backdated grants of our stock options to our executives. The Consolidated Class Complaint does not specify the damages sought by the Plaintiffs and no discovery has been conducted to date.

The original Complaint charges Newpark and certain of the Company's executive officers with violations of federal securities laws. Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants' material omissions and dissemination of materially false and misleading statements concerning Newpark's business and operations caused the Company's stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors. Newpark provides fluids management, environmental, and oilfield services, including drilling fluids sales, engineering services and onsite drilling fluids processing services, to the oil and gas exploration and production industry. The Complaint alleges that defendants' Class Period representations regarding Newpark were materially false and misleading when made because the Company failed to disclose irregularities with the processing and payment of invoices by the Company's subsidiary, Soloco Texas, LP. As a result, defendants' Class Period statements concerning Newpark's operations and financial performance were materially false and misleading.

The complaint further alleges that on or around April 17, 2006, Newpark issued a press release announcing a Company investigation into the processing and payment of invoices at Soloco Texas, LP, and that Newpark's CFO and former CEO had been placed on administrative leave pending the completion of the investigation. This news shocked the market, causing shares of Newpark to plummet that same day by $1.28 per share, to close on April 17, 2006, at $6.14 per share -- more than 17% below the previous day's close, which was before disclosure of the invoice irregularities and consequent investigation.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3533
Sector: Energy
Industry: Oil Well Services & Equipment

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Newpark Resources, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	NR
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.newpark.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Sandra M. Kim, et al. v. Newpark Resources, Inc., et al.

COURT: E.D. Louisiana	DOCKET NUMBER: 06-CV-02150
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Marcel Livaudais
DATE FILED: 04/21/2006	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/28/2005	CLASS PERIOD END: 04/16/2006
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP 3620 East Layton Ave., Cudahy, WI, 53110 (voice) 866-264-3995, (fax) 414-482-8001, inquiry@ademilaw.com Federman & Sherwood 120 North Robinson, Suite 2720, Oklahoma City, OK, 73102 (voice) 405-235-1560, (fax) , wfederman@aol.com Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles) 1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, CA, 90067 (voice) (310) 201-915, (fax) (310) 201-916, info@glancylaw.com Kahn Gauthier Swick, LLC (New Orleans) 650 Poydras St. Suite 2150, New Orleans, LA, 70130 (voice) (504) 455-1400, (fax) , lewis.kahn@kglg.com Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, LLP (former New York, NY) 805 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY, 10022 (voice) 212.687.1980, (fax) 212.687.7714, info@kaplanfox.com Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD, 21202 (voice) 410.332.0030, (fax) , pivenlaw@erols.com Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP 275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, New York, NY, 10016 (voice) 212.682.1818, (fax) 212.682.1892, email@murrayfrank.com Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP (New York) 100 Park Avenue, 26th Floor, New York, NY, 10017-5516ven (voice) 212.661.1100, (fax) 212.661.8665, info@pomerantzlaw.com/ Schatz & Nobel, P.C. 330 Main Street, Hartford, CT, 06106 (voice) 800.797.5499, (fax) 860.493.6290, sn06106@AOL.com Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com Stull, Stull & Brody (New York) 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY, 10017 (voice) 310.209.2468, (fax) 310.209.2087, SSBNY@aol.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 11

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violations of Federal Securities Laws - Jury Trial Demanded
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 04/21/2006
Order And Reasons
Type: Order Appointing LP/LC		Date on the document: 08/16/2006

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: Newpark Resources, Inc. Securities Litigation

COURT: E.D. Louisiana	DOCKET NUMBER: 06-CV-02150
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Marcel Livaudais
DATE FILED: 11/09/2006	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/14/2002	CLASS PERIOD END: 10/10/2006
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated Complaint
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles) 1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, CA, 90067 (voice) (310) 201-915, (fax) (310) 201-916, info@glancylaw.com Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Boca Raton) 197 South Federal Highway, Suite 200, Boca Raton, FL, 33432 (voice) 561.750.3000, (fax) 56.750.3364, info@lerachlaw.com Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville) 58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Melville, NY, 11747 (voice) 631.367.7100, (fax) 631.367.1173, _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 3

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Class Action Complaint For Securities Fraud
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 11/09/2006
Lead Plaintiffs' Motion For Preliminary Approval Of Class Action Settlement
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 7/27/2007
Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement And Providing For Notice
Type: Order		Date on the document: 8/1/2007
Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice
Type: Order		Date on the document: 10/9/2007
Order Granting Motion For An Award Of Attorneys' Fees And Expenses
Type: Order Approving AF&E		Date on the document: 10/9/2007
US District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 10/09/2007

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded
Case Name and/or Number: Jan Wallace, et al. v. Newpark Resources, Inc., et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 05/05/2006

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

�