 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
TETRA Technologies Inc. Summary: On October 27, 2008 a motion to dismiss the amended complaint was filed by the defendants. On August 26, 2008, an Amended Complaint was filed with a jury demand against all defendants.
On May 27, 2008, several motions for appointment of lead plaintiffs and the selections of lead counsels were filed separately by New Jersey Carpenters Pension Fund, Fulton County Employees' Retirement System, and Michigan Pension Funds. At the same time, the Michigan Pension Fund also filed a proposed order in regards to the above mentioned matter. The court finally granted the Fulton County Employees' Retirement System to be appointed as lead plaintiff and its selection of lead counsel on June 27, 2008. Lastly, an agreed scheduling/docket control order was entered on August 04, 2008.
On May 08, 2008, a motion to consolidate cases was filed by the City of Livonia Employees' Retirement System and TETRA Technologies Inc. As a result, the Judge granted the motion to consolidate cases and entered its order at the same time.
According to a press release dated March 28, 2008 the complaint charges TETRA and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company operates as an oil and gas services company worldwide. It manufactures integrated calcium chloride and brominated products, and supplies feedstocks to energy and other markets.
The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements and failed to disclose the following adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (i) that the Company’s Well Abandonment and Decommissioning (“WA&D”) division was not performing according to internal expectations; (ii) that the Company failed to timely take a charge for insurance receivables which remain uncollected; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its prospects.
On August 3, 2007, the Company announced its financial results for the second quarter of 2007 and reduced its full year 2007 earnings guidance because of, among other things, poor profits at its WA&D services. Shares of TETRA stock fell 25% following this announcement. Then, on October 16, 2007, TETRA issued a press release announcing that it was withdrawing its previously estimated full year 2007 earnings guidance because of, among other things, the Company’s concern that it would have to take a charge to earnings for substantial uncollected insurance receivables. In response to this announcement, the price of TETRA common stock fell an additional $1.76 per share, or approximately 8%, to close at $19.86 per share, on heavy trading volume.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 2810
Sector: Energy
Industry: Oil Well Services & Equipment
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | TETRA Technologies Inc. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | TTI |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.tetratec.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| City of Livonia Employees' Retirement System, et al. v. TETRA Technologies Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Class Action Complaint for Violations of Federal Securities Laws - Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 03/27/2008 | ||
| [Proposed] Order Appointing Lead Plaintiff and Approving Selection of Lead and Liaison Counsel | |||
| Type: Order Appointing LP/LC | Date on the document: 04/28/2008 | ||
| Order | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 5/8/2008 | ||
| US District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 10/29/2008 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| In Re TETRA Technologies, Inc. Securities Litigation | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Amended Consolidated Complaint | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 08/26/2008 | ||
| Defendants TETRA Technologies, Inc., Geoffrey M. Hertel, George McCarroll and Raymond Symens’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Consolidated Complaint | |||
| Type: Motion | Date on the document: 10/27/2008 | ||
| 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