Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

v3.20.4
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
6 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2020
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

NOTE 9 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES  

 

Office Lease. Information regarding the Company’s office space is disclosed in greater detail above under “Note 4 - Property and Equipment –Leases”, above.

  

Lineal (which as of December 31, 2019, has been completely divested in connection with the Lineal Divestiture discussed in “Note 1 – General” and “Note 11 – Lineal Merger Agreement and Divestiture”) has the usual liability of contractors for the completion of contracts and the warranty of its work. In addition, Lineal acts as the prime contractor on a majority of the projects it undertakes and is normally responsible for the performance of the entire project, including subcontract work. Management is not aware of any material exposure related thereto which has not been provided for in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

 

Legal Proceedings. From time to time suits and claims against Camber arise in the ordinary course of Camber’s business, including contract disputes and title disputes. Camber records reserves for contingencies when information available indicates that a loss is probable, and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated.

 

Maranatha Oil Matter

 

In November 2015, Randy L. Robinson, d/b/a Maranatha Oil Co. sued the Company in Gonzales County, Texas (Cause No. 26160). The plaintiff alleged that it assigned oil and gas leases to the Company in April 2010, retaining a 4% overriding royalty interest and 50% working interest and that the Company failed to pay such overriding royalty interest or royalty interest. The interests relate to certain oil and gas properties which the Company subsequently sold to Nordic Oil USA in April 2013. The petition alleges causes of actions for breach of contract, failure to pay royalties, non-payment of working interest, fraud, fraud in the inducement of contract, money had and received, constructive trust, violation of theft liability act, continuing tort, and fraudulent concealment. The suit seeks approximately $100,000 in amounts alleged owed, plus pre-and post-judgment interest. The Company has filed a denial to the claims and intends to vehemently defend itself against the allegations.

  

PetroGlobe Energy Holdings, LLC and Signal Drilling, LLC

 

In March 2019, PetroGlobe and Signal sued the Company in the 316th Judicial District of Hutchinson County, Texas (Cause No. 43781). The plaintiffs alleged causes of action relating to negligent misrepresentation; fraud and willful misconduct; gross negligence; statutory fraud; breach of contract; and specific performance, in connection with a purchase and sale agreement entered into between the parties in March 2018, relating to the purchase by plaintiffs of certain oil and gas assets from the Company, and a related joint venture agreement. The lawsuit seeks in excess of $600,000 in damages, as well as pre- and post-judgment interest, court costs and attorneys’ fees, and punitive and exemplary damages. Additionally, a portion of the revenues from the properties in contention are being held in suspense as a result of the lawsuit. On October 31, 2019, the Company brought counterclaims against PetroGlobe and Signal, and Petrolia Oil, LLC, and Ian Acrey, including bringing claims for causes of actions including declaratory judgment (that PetroGlobe and certain other plaintiffs represented that a lease and related wells were free of all agreements and rights in favor of third parties and provided a special warranty of title pursuant to the purchase and sale agreement); breach of contract (in connection with the purchase and sale agreement); statutory fraud; common law fraud (against Mr. Acrey and other plaintiffs); fraud by non-disclosure (against Mr. Acrey and other plaintiffs); negligent misrepresentation (against Mr. Acrey and other plaintiffs); breach of fiduciary duty (against Mr. Acrey and other plaintiffs) and seeking attorney’s fees and pre- and post-judgment interest.

  

On May 30, 2019, the Company received a Severance Order from the Texas Railroad Commission (the “TRC”) for noncompliance with TRC rules, suspending the Company’s ability to produce or sell oil and gas from its Panhandle leases in Hutchinson County, Texas, until certain well performance criteria were met. Subsequent to that date, the Company followed TRC procedures in order to regain TRC compliance for the Panhandle wells.

 

On January 31, 2020, the Company entered into a Compromise Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) with PetroGlobe Energy Holdings, LLC (“PetroGlobe”), Signal Drilling, LLC (“Signal”), Petrolia Oil, LLC (“Petrolia”), Prairie Gas Company of Oklahoma, LLC (“PGCO”), and Canadian River Trading Company, LLC (“CRTC”). Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the Company agreed to pay PetroGlobe $250,000, of which $100,000 was due upon execution of the Settlement Agreement, which payment has been made, and $150,000 was paid to an escrow account, which release was subject to approval by the Company upon the successful transfer of all wells and partnership interests of the Company’s current wholly-owned subsidiary CE to PetroGlobe, which occurred on July 16, 2020.

 

On July 16, 2020, the Company completed all of the requirements of the Settlement Agreement and assigned PetroGlobe all of its right, title, and interest in all wells, leases, royalties, minerals, equipment, and other tangible assets associated with specified wells and properties, located in Hutchinson County, Texas, the $150,000 held in escrow was released to PetroGlobe and the Settlement Agreement transactions closed. As a result of the transfers, the Company no longer owns CE, and no longer has any interest in or any liabilities related to the Hutchinson County, Texas wells.

 

The Company recognized a net settlement cost of $204,842 included on the statement of operations for the year ended March 31, 2020, in connection with the settlement. All provisions of the settlement were finalized, and the $150,000, held in escrow pending final approvals, was released on July 16, 2020.

 

The Company released the parties to the Settlement Agreement, including Ian Acrey, individually, as well as their officers, directors, or members from any claims asserted in the lawsuit, and the parties to the Settlement Agreement along with Ian Acrey, individually, released the Company, its officers, directors, shareholders and affiliate corporations from any claims asserted in the lawsuit. The Company did not release any claims or causes of action against N&B Energy, LLC, Sezar Energy, LLP related to Richard Azar, or any of their affiliates, or predecessors, or successors.

 

The parties filed a motion and order to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice shortly after the execution of the Settlement Agreement.

 

Apache Corporation

 

In December 2018, Apache Corporation (“Apache”) sued Camber, Sezar Energy, L.P., and Texokcan Energy Management Inc., in the 129th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas (Cause 2018-89515). Apache alleged causes of action for Breach of Contract, Money Had & Received and Conversion, relating to amounts Apache alleged it was owed under a joint operating agreement. Apache is seeking $656,908 in actual damages, exemplary damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, court costs, and other amounts to which it may be entitled. Camber filed a general denial to the claims and asserted the affirmative defense of failure to mitigate. On July 13, 2020, Apache filed a Second Amended Petition against Camber, Sezar, Texokcan, N&B Energy, LLC, and Richard N. Azar, II alleging Breach of Contract, Defaults under a Joint Operating Agreement, Money Had & Received and Conversion, relating to amounts Apache allegedly overpaid Sezar and Azar and Unjust Enrichment. On October 26, 2020, the Company entered into an agreement with Apache to obtain a release of all liability (both parties provided mutual releases) for $20,000 and dismissed the litigation against the Company, which was recorded in accrued liabilities as of September 30, 2020.

 

N&B Energy

 

On September 12, 2019, N&B Energy filed a petition in the District Court for the 285th Judicial District of Bexar County, Texas (Case #2019CI11816). Pursuant to the petition, N&B Energy raises claims against the Company for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, money had and received and disgorgement, in connection with $706,000 which it alleges it is owed under the July 2018 Asset Purchase Agreement between the Company and N&B Energy (the “Sale Agreement”), for true-ups and post-closing adjustments associated therewith. The petition seeks amounts owed, pre- and post-judgment interest, and attorney’s fees. On October 21, 2020, the arbitrator issued an Interim Stage II Order granting an award that acknowledged the claims of both parties that resulted in an arbitration award in favor of N&B Energy of approximately $52,000, which was recorded in accrued liabilities as of September 30, 2020.

 

Service Agreements

 

In connection with the entry into the Amended and Restated Agreement and Plan of Merger with Viking, on August 31, 2020, the Company’s Board of Directors entered into Past Service Payment and Success Bonus Agreements with each non-executive member of the Board of Directors, and each of Louis G. Schott, our Interim Chief Executive Officer and Robert Schleizer, our Chief Financial Officer (collectively, the “Merger Compensation Agreements”). Pursuant to such agreements: each non-executive director, and each officer, of the Company, is to receive, contingent upon closing the Merger, a payment of $100,000 in consideration for past services provided to the Company through the date of the Merger as a member of the Board of Directors/officer, and $50,000 as a success bonus for the Company’s successful completion of the Merger, contingent on such non-executive director/officer’s, continued service to the Company at the same level of service he is currently performing, through the effective date of the Merger.

 

Additionally on August 31, 2020, the Company entered into first amendments to the letter agreements the Company had previously entered into with Fides Energy LLC, an entity owned and controlled by Mr. Schott (“Fides”) and BlackBriar Advisors LLC, an entity owned and controlled by Mr. Schleizer (“BlackBriar”), to provide that (a) Mr. Schott, through Fides, will continue to provide services to the Company for a period of six months following the closing of the Merger, on similar terms as set forth in such original letter agreement, except in a non-executive capacity and that the Company will reimburse Mr. Schott for the costs of his and his family’s health insurance through such six month term; and (b) Mr. Schleizer, through BlackBriar, will continue to provide services to the Company for a period of three months following the closing of the Merger, on similar terms as set forth in such original letter agreement, except in a non-executive capacity and for total consideration of $30,000 per month (compared to $40,000 per month currently).