Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 03/01/2016 (Settlement preliminarily approval)

Filing Date: August 04, 2014

According to the law firm press release, the Complaint charges that Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, including that the Company was understating operating costs and overstating capital expenditures and royalty expenses; and the Company's improper accounting practices were causing Penn West to be at risk of non-compliance with certain of its debt covenants.

On July 29, 2014, the Company disclosed that its Audit Committee was conducting an internal review of certain of its accounting practices. Thus far, the Audit Committee has concluded that the Company improperly reclassified approximately $181 million in operating expenses as capital expenditures, and had "incorrectly reclassified" approximately $200 million in additional operating expenses as royalty expenses for 2012 and 2013. The Company will restate its past financial statements for years 2012 and 2013 and certain interim periods, and consequently, may not be in compliance with certain of its debt covenants.

On this news, Penn West shares declined $1.30 per share or 14% on July 30, 2014.

On October 29, 2014, the Court issued an Order appointing lead plaintiff and lead counsel. Lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint on December 19.

The parties entered into a Stipulation of Settlement on February 12, 2016. This Settlement was preliminarily approved by the Court on March 1.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Energy
Industry: Oil & Gas Operations
Headquarters: Canada

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: PWE
Company Market: New York SE
Market Status: Public (Listed)

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 14-CV-06046
JUDGE: Hon. John G. Koeltl
DATE FILED: 08/04/2014
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/01/2012
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/29/2014
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Wolf Popper, LLP
    845 Third Avenue, Wolf Popper, LLP, NY 10022-6689
    877.370.7703 212.486.2093 · IRRep@wolfpopper.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: S.D. New York
DOCKET #: 14-CV-06046
JUDGE: Hon. John G. Koeltl
DATE FILED: 12/19/2014
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/18/2010
CLASS PERIOD END: 07/29/2014
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (New York, NY)
    1285 Avenue of the Americas, 33rd Floor, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (New York, NY), NY 10019
    212.554.1400 212.554.1444 · blbg@blbglaw.com
  2. Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles)
    1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311, Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (Los Angeles), CA 90067
    310.201.915 310. 201-916 · info@glancylaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date