Bei uns heißt es Insolvent!!! Ach und ein paar Prozesse wegen Zahlungsunfähigkeit haben die auch noch...
Litigation
On July 20, 2006, an action was commenced in the District Court of Erath County, Texas, against Terax by Centex Pipeline Construction, Inc. for failure to pay for services performed, breach of contract and to foreclose on Plaintiff’s mechanic lien. The Complaint alleges that Terax and Centex entered into an agreement for to install certain components of a gas pipeline gathering system on Terax’s Mitchell Ranch property in Erath County, Texas. The Complaint further alleges that the Plaintiff completed work on June 5, 2006 and that Terax has failed to pay certain outstanding invoices. The Plaintiff’s have filed a mechanic’s lien to create a security interest against the gathering line and compressor station. The Plaintiff’s are seeking damages in the amount of $510,319 plus interest, attorney fees and entry of an Order of Sale directing the Sheriff to sell the property covered by the Plaintiff’s mechanic lien.
Terax has filed a general denial and a Counterclaim and third-party claim for declaratory judgment in response to Centex’s petition and has requested discovery. A motion for summary judgment filed by Centex is pending.
Provided Terax can obtain the funds, it is our plan is to seek a settlement with Centex and it’s bank provided that Terax can be assured that no subcontractors will file liens on Terax’s property and that Terax has no risk of liability to Centex’s bank for not making all payments directly to the bank. Alternatively, Terax may ask the court to accept a payment of funds into the registry of the court in order to protect Terax from further liability and cost.
On August 28, 2006, an action was commenced in the District Court of Travis County, Texas, against Terax, Andrew Hromyk and Starr County Energy, Inc. by Sam Warren and Tennessee Eastern Oil & Gas, Inc. for damages for breach of a personal services contract with the Plaintiffs or in the alternative, based upon the doctrine of quantum merit, for value of services which Plaintiff’s allegedly rendered to Defendants. The complaint alleges that in early 2006, Tennessee Eastern and Starr County entered into an agreement to purchase certain oil and gas properties located in Tennessee, which agreement was terminated. The complaint alleges that Hromyk continued discussions with Plaintiff Warren and indicated that a lawsuit filed against Terax by William Rhea was impeding the potential sale of the Tennessee property, at which point, Warren offered to assist with settling the William Rhea lawsuit. The complaint further alleged that Plaintiffs negotiated and mediated a settlement of the William Rhea lawsuit and that after the lawsuit was settled, the Defendants breached their agreement to purchase the Tennessee property for $5.7 million. The Plaintiffs are seeking a judgment against the Defendants in the amount of $5.7 million and attorneys’ fees and expenses and costs of court.
On November 10, 2006, the plaintiff and the defendants met for negotiations and reached a settlement agreement subject to documentation. Terax will agree to pay $50,000 for settlement of all claims against Terax.
On September 22, 2006, an action was commenced in the District Court of Erath County, Texas, by Geosite, Inc. against Terax and Bill Chester for breach of contract and foreclosure of lien. The Plaintiff alleges that Terax has failed to pay for certain goods, merchandise, or services sold to Terax. The complaint is seeking $10,930 allegedly owed to the Plaintiff’s, attorney fees and an order of foreclosure of Plaintiff’s lien. Terax has responded to the Geosite lawsuit in a timely manner but plans to reach a settlement with Geosite in the near Future provided funds are available.
On October 3, 2006, an action was commenced in the District Court of Erath County, Texas, by Digital Mud Logging, LLC against Terax for breach of contract and foreclosure of lien. The Plaintiff alleges Terax has failed to pay for certain goods, merchandise, or services sold to Terax. The complaint is seeking $11,200 plus interest and allegedly owed to the Plaintiff’s attorney fees and an order of foreclosure of Plaintiff’s lien. Terax has responded to the Digital Mud Logging, LLC lawsuit in a timely manner but plans to reach a settlement with Digital Mud in the near future provided funds are available
On October 5, 2006, an action was commenced in the District Court of Erath County, Texas, by BJ Services Company, USA against Terax for breach of contract and foreclosure of lien. The Plaintiff alleges that Terax has failed to pay for certain goods, merchandise, or services sold to Terax. The complaint is seeking $475,844 plus interest and allegedly owed to the Plaintiff’s attorney fees and an order of foreclosure of Plaintiff’s lien. Terax has responded to the BJ Services lawsuit in a timely manner but plans to reach a settlement with BJ Services in the near future provided funds are available.
On November 3, 2006, Terax was notified that BJ Services filed a Motion for Summary Judgment with the court. A hearing for the motion has not been set.
On October 10, 2006, an action was commenced in the District Court of Erath County, Texas, by J.D. Fields & Company, Inc. against Terax for breach of contract and foreclosure of lien. The Plaintiff alleges that Terax has failed to pay for certain goods, merchandise, or services sold to Terax. The complaint is seeking $305,216 plus interest and allegedly owed to the Plaintiff’s attorney fees and an order of foreclosure of Plaintiff’s lien. Terax has responded to the J. D. Fields lawsuit in a timely manner but plans to reach a settlement with J.D. Fields in the near future provided funds are available
On October 18, 2006, an action was commenced in the District Court of Erath County, Texas, by Schlumberger Technology Corporation against Terax for breach of contract and foreclosure of lien. The Plaintiff alleges that Terax has failed to pay for certain goods, merchandise, or services sold to Terax. The complaint is seeking $49,287 plus interest and allegedly owed to the Plaintiff’s attorney fees and an order of foreclosure of Plaintiff’s lien. Terax has responded to the Schlumberger lawsuit in a timely manner but plans to reach a settlement with Schlumberger in the near future provided funds are available
On October 19, 2006, an action was commenced in the Precinct 3, Place 3, Justice of the Peace Court, Dallas County, Texas, by Riviera Finance of Texas, Inc. on behalf of NTX Roadrunner Transportation, LLC against Terax for breach of contract and foreclosure of lien. The Plaintiff alleges that Terax has failed to pay for certain goods, merchandise, or services sold to Terax. The complaint is seeking $3,938 plus interest and allegedly owed to the Plaintiff’s attorney fees and an order of foreclosure of Plaintiff’s lien. Terax has responded to the Riviera lawsuit in a timely manner but plans to reach a settlement with Riviera in the near future provided funds are available.
On October 19, 2006, an action was commenced in the District Court of Erath County, Texas, by Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations, Inc. against Terax for breach of contract and foreclosure of lien. The Plaintiff alleges that Terax has failed to pay for certain goods, merchandise, or services sold to Terax. The complaint is seeking $55,523 plus interest and allegedly owed to the Plaintiff’s attorney fees and an order of foreclosure of Plaintiff’s lien. Terax has responded to the Baker Hughes lawsuit in a timely manner but plans to reach a settlement with Baker Hughes in the near future provided funds are available.
10
--------------------------------------------------
On October 26, 2006, an action was commenced in the District Court of Erath County, Texas, by Jay Mills Contracting, Inc. against Terax for breach of contract and foreclosure of lien. The Plaintiff alleges that Terax has failed to pay for certain goods, merchandise, or services sold to Terax. The complaint is seeking $72,979 plus interest and allegedly owed to the Plaintiff’s attorney fees and an order of foreclosure of Plaintiff’s lien. Terax has responded to the Jay Mills lawsuit in a timely manner but plans to reach a settlement with Jay Mills in the near future provided funds are available.
On November 2, 2006, an action was commenced in the County Court at Law No.2, Dallas County, Texas, by Leam Drilling Systems, Inc. against Terax for breach of contract and foreclosure of lien. The Plaintiff alleges that Terax has failed to pay for certain goods, merchandise, or services sold to Terax. The complaint is seeking $113,488 plus interest and allegedly owed to the Plaintiff’s attorney fees and an order of foreclosure of Plaintiff’s lien. Terax plans to respond to the Leam Drilling lawsuit in a timely manner but plans to reach a settlement with Leam Drilling in the near future provided funds are available.
On November 9, 2006, an action was commenced in the District Court of Erath County, Texas , by Red River Well Service, Ltd, Shale Tank Truck, LP, and Bell Supply I, LP (“the Plaintiff’s”) against Terax for breach of contract and foreclosure of lien. The Plaintiff’s alleges that Terax has failed to pay for certain goods, merchandise, or services sold to Terax. The complaint is seeking $279,078 plus interest and allegedly owed to the Plaintiff’s attorney fees and an order of foreclosure of Plaintiff’s lien. Terax plans to respond to the Plaintiff’s lawsuit in a timely manner but plans to reach a settlement with Plaintiff’s in the near future provided funds are available.
|
Thread abonnieren
