XML 35 R10.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.3.0.814
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2015
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES [Abstract]  
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
NOTE 5 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Lease Commitment

The Company leases office facilities under an operating lease agreement that expires on May 31, 2017.  As of September 30, 2015, the lease agreement requires future payments as follows:

Year
 
Amount
 
2015
 
$
23,695
 
2016
  
96,162
 
2017
  
40,479
 
Total
 
$
160,336
 

For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2015, the total base rental expense was $30,106 and $78,595, respectively.  The Company does not have any capital leases or other operating lease commitments.

Legal Contingencies

The Company is subject to legal proceedings, claims and liabilities that arise in the ordinary course of its business. The Company accrues for losses associated with legal claims when such losses are probable and can be reasonably estimated. These accruals are adjusted as further information develops or circumstances change.

Silverman Shareholder Class Action Suit.  On April 27, 2012, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against the Company and certain of its executive officers: Steve Silverman v. Houston American Energy Corp. et al., Case No. 4:12-CV-1332.  The complaint generally alleged that, between March 29, 2010 and April 18, 2012, all of the defendants violated Sections 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 and the individual defendants violated Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act in making materially false and misleading statements including certain statements related to the status and viability of the Tamandua #1 well on the Company’s CPO 4 prospect. Two additional class action lawsuits were filed against us in May 2012. The complaints sought unspecified damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, and other costs. On September 20, 2012, the court consolidated the class action lawsuits and appointed a lead plaintiff and, on November 15, 2012, the lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint.  The amended complaint, among other things, expanded the putative class period to November 9, 2009 to April 18, 2012 and added allegations challenging a November 2009 estimate concerning the CPO 4 prospect.  On January 14, 2013, the Company filed a motion to dismiss and, on August 22, 2013, the court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint. The plaintiffs subsequently filed a Notice of Appeal of the dismissal of the complaint. On July 15, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the dismissal of the case. The appellate court ruling focused on the sufficiency of the pleadings in the case, made no determination regarding the merits of the factual allegations, and remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings. In October 2014, the parties reached an agreement in principle to settle the consolidated lawsuit. The settlement, which provided for a $7,000,000 payment expected to be fully funded by the Company’s insurance, was subject to preliminary and final approval of the court. The parties submitted the settlement to the court for approval on December 31, 2014.  The court signed an order on April 16, 2015 preliminarily approving the settlement.  Pursuant to the terms of the settlement, the Company, through its insurer, was required to escrow settlement funds in the amount of $7,000,000. In May 2015, the Company's insurer deposited the required funds into an escrow account to fund the settlement. On July 29, 2015, the court rendered a final judgment approving the settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.  As a result, the $7,000,000 litigation settlement payable and the related insurance claim receivable were each reflected as settled on the Company’s balance sheet at September 30, 2015.

SEC Administrative Proceeding.  On August 4, 2014, following a multi-year investigation, the SEC instituted administrative cease-and-desist proceedings pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, styled In the Matter of Houston American Energy Corp., John F. Terwilliger, Jr., Undiscovered Equities, Inc. and Kevin T. McKnight.  The administrative proceeding alleged that Mr. Terwilliger and, in turn, Houston American Energy, made false and misleading statements with respect to the CPO 4 prospect and promoted those statements through Undiscovered Equities and its principal, Kevin McKnight. The SEC was seeking a determination from an administrative law judge as to whether (i) the allegations of the SEC were true; (ii) Houston American Energy and Mr. Terwilliger should be ordered to (A) cease-and-desist from committing or causing violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, (B) pay a civil penalty pursuant to Section 8A(g) of the Securities Act and Section 21B(a) of the Exchange Act, and (C) pay disgorgement pursuant to Section 8A(e) of the Securities Act and Sections 21B(e) and 21C(e) of the Exchange Act; and (iii) Mr. Terwilliger should be prohibited from acting as an officer and director of a public company pursuant to Section 8A(f) of the Securities Act and Section 21C(f) of the Exchange Act.

At December 31, 2014, the administrative proceeding was pending and was scheduled for trial in January 2015.  The trial was stayed in January 2015 pending consideration by the Commission of a proposed settlement. On April 16, 2015, the Commission formally approved the settlement. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement, among other things, the Company paid a penalty of $400,000 and the Company’s Chief Executive Officer resigned and paid a penalty of $150,000.  The Company, at December 31, 2014, had recorded on its balance sheet a contingent liability, and on its statement of operations a contingent loss of $400,000 relating to the settlement.  The Company has an insurance policy that insures for legal fees incurred in connection with the above administrative proceeding.  At December 31, 2014, the Company had recorded an insurance claim receivable of $1,612,681 for fees which have been incurred, but not yet reimbursed by its insurance company.  As of September 30, 2015, there was an outstanding insurance claim receivable of $45,792 related to unpaid accrued legal fees.