X hits on this document

PDF document

Edgar Filing: TIDELANDS OIL & GAS CORP/WA - Form 10-K - page 20 / 83

316 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

20 / 83

Edgar Filing: TIDELANDS OIL & GAS CORP/WA - Form 10-K

court has now dismissed Northern's claims against Tidelands.

On Novembe its answer Northern, promissory fraudulent against N into an ag part of th indebtedne from such

r 28, 2005, ZG Gathe

to Northern's Fif and its answer and c

notes given by ZG a misrepresentations orthern. ZG's cross reement to purchase at agreement, Tide ss of ZG, and to def

indebtedness,

to

p

ring, Ltd. and ZG th Amended Petiti ross claim against nd Sheerin to Nort

and it claims u action against Ti the Zavala Gather lands agreed to s end, indemnify, ay off a Sheerin l

million

shares of

Tidelands

shares.

ZG claims

that Tidela

stock,

of which

nds

breached

this

the

Northern

indebtedness,

f

ailing

to

defend

a

the $300,00

0

by placing

a

failing to pay

off

in Tidelands,

and

note, failing stop transfer or

Pipeline Manageme on, its counter Tidelands. ZG co hern were procure nspecified amoun delands claims Ti

ing System

from

atisfy the

$3,70

and

hold ZG and S

oan

of $300,000,

500,000 was to b agreement by fai

nd

indemnify it

to

issue the free

der

on

the

restri

nt ("ZG") filed

  • -

    claim against

ntends that the d by Northern's ts of damages delands entered ZG and that, as 0,914 Northern heerin harmless and to issue 1 e free trading ling to satisfy from such debt, trading shares cted stock that

was issued recovery of

by Tidelands. ZG seeks specific performance of an unspecified amount of damages, and its attorney's

the fees.

agreement,

Much of the discovery has been completed at this time.

Based on

investigation,

and discovery to to the claims of these lawsuits. uncertainties in

date,

Sheerin

Tidelands appears to have

and

Northern.

Tideland's

a number of potential defenses intends to aggressively defend

The

complexity

litigation

of

this

of the

kind

issues in this case and

prevent

a

more

definitive

the inherent evaluation of

the extent of Tidelands' liability exposure.

Matter No. 2:

On May 4, 2005, HBH Development

Company,

LLC,

("HBH")

initiated legal action

against

Texas,

Sonterra

Energy

Corporation

98th

Judicial

District,

Cause

in the District

No.

GN

501626

HBH

Court of Travis Development Co.,

County, LLC vs.

  • -

    17-

Sonterra

Energy Corp. This action involves the developer of the Austin's Colony

Subdivision in Travis County, Texas and the originally constructed by Southern Union Company.

propane distribution system Southern Union entered into a

letter agreement with HBH concerning the construction and operation of a propane

distribution

system in the

subdivision

to

be owned and

operated

by Southern

Union. propane

Southern Union system to Oneok,

assigned Inc.,

the the

letter parent

agreement and its interests in the

company

of

Oneok

Propane

Company.

Sonterra Distribut HBH rent alleges t acquired effective Sonterra' damages, distribut attorneys

acquired i ion Company. and easemen hat Sonterr rights in t , for brea s rights in cancellatio ion system, fees. HBH

ts interest in

the

propane

system f

HBH is claiming

that

Sonterra

has faile

t

use fees

a's

actions

under

the terms

of

the

lett

cause

a failure

of

the

ass

he

propane

system

or

alternatively,

i

ch the

of contract. HBH seeks to propane distribution system,

have th award u

n

of

the

contract

and

rights

associate

issue to HBH a writ of possession

has

amended

its

complaint

adding

for th claims

rom Oneok Propane d or refused to pay er agreement. HBH ignment whereby it f the assignment is e court terminate nspecified monetary d with the propane e property, and for for mutual mistake

and reformation as to the letter of the letter agreement.

agreement

and a developer's

bonus under terms

Sonterra is defending the legal

letter

agreement

between

HBH

action. It Development

that the easement use fees in the propane distribution

terminated when system to Oneok

believes that under the terms of the

Company and Southern Union Company, Southern Union conveyed its interest Propane Company.

Matter No. 3:

On May 4, 2005, Senna Hills, Ltd. initiated

legal action against Sonterra Energy

Corporation

in the

District

Court of

Travis

County,

Texas,

53rd

Judicial

20

Document info
Document views316
Page views316
Page last viewedTue Dec 06 18:56:25 UTC 2016
Pages83
Paragraphs15149
Words37471

Comments