XML 20 R11.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.23.3
Lawsuits, Claims, Commitments and Contingencies
 9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Lawsuits, Claims, Commitments and Contingencies Lawsuits, Claims, Commitments and Contingencies
In the normal course of business, we, or our subsidiaries, are the subject of, or party to, pending or threatened legal proceedings, contingencies and commitments involving a variety of matters that seek, or may seek, among other things, compensation for alleged personal injury, breach of contract, property damage or other losses, punitive damages, fines and penalties, remediation costs, or injunctive or declaratory relief.
We accrue for currently outstanding lawsuits, claims and proceedings when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the liability can be reasonably estimated. We have not recorded any reserve balances at September 30, 2023 and December 31, 2022. We also evaluate the amount of reasonably possible losses that we could incur as a result of these matters. We believe that reasonably possible losses that we could incur in excess of accruals on our balance sheet would not be material to our consolidated financial position or results of operations.
We, or our subsidiaries, or both, have indemnified various parties against specific liabilities those parties might incur in the future in connection with transactions that they have entered into with us. As of September 30, 2023, we are not aware of material indemnity claims pending or threatened against us.
Securities Litigation Matters
On November 20, 2020, Luis Torres, individually and on behalf of a putative class, filed a securities class action lawsuit (the “Securities Class Action”) in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas against Berry Corp. and certain of its current and former directors and officers (collectively, the “Defendants”). The complaint asserts violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (as amended, the “Securities Act”), and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act of 1934 (as amended, the “Exchange Act”), on behalf of a putative class of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired (i) common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the Company’s 2018 IPO; or (ii) Berry Corp.’s securities between July 26, 2018 and November 3, 2020 (the “Class Period”). In particular, the complaint alleges that the Defendants made false and misleading statements during the Class Period and in the offering materials for the IPO, concerning the Company’s business, operational efficiency and stability, and compliance policies, that artificially inflated the Company’s stock price, resulting in injury to the purported class members when the value of Berry Corp.’s common stock declined following release of its financial results for the third quarter of 2020 on November 3, 2020.
On November 1, 2021, the court-appointed co-lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint asserting claims on behalf of the same putative class under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, alleging, among other things, that the Company and the individual Defendants made false and misleading statements between July 26, 2018 and November 3, 2020 regarding the Company’s permits and permitting processes. The amended complaint does not quantify the alleged losses but seeks to recover all damages sustained by the putative class as a result of these alleged securities violations, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. The Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on January 24, 2022 and on September 13, 2022, the court issued an order denying that motion, and the case moved into discovery. On February 13, 2023, the plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification, and on April 14, 2023, the defendants filed their opposition; the plaintiffs filed their reply on May 26, 2023, and a hearing on the motion for class certification was set for August 23, 2023.
On July 31, 2023, the parties executed a Memorandum of Understanding memorializing an agreement-in-principle to settle all claims in the Securities Class Action for an aggregate sum of $2.5 million. On September 18, 2023, the plaintiffs and Defendants executed a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement, and the plaintiffs filed a motion seeking preliminary approval of the settlement. On October 18, 2023, the Court granted that motion, issuing a preliminary approval order and scheduling a final settlement approval hearing for February 6, 2024. The parties will now move forward with the notice and approval process, which is expected to include, among other things, the February 6, 2024 final approval hearing, an opt-out process, and opportunities for class members to object to the settlement. The Defendants continue to maintain that the claims are without merit and admit no liability in connection with the settlement.
On October 20, 2022, a shareholder derivative lawsuit (the “Assad Lawsuit”) was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas by putative stockholder George Assad, allegedly on behalf of the Company, that piggy-backs on the Securities Class Action and which is currently pending before the same court. The derivative complaint names certain current and former officers and directors as defendants, and generally alleges that they breached their fiduciary duties by causing or failing to prevent the securities violations alleged in the securities class action. The derivative complaint also alleges claims for unjust enrichment as against all defendants, and claims for contribution and indemnification under Sections 10(b) and 21D of the Exchange Act. On January 27, 2023, the court granted the parties’ joint stipulated request to stay the Assad Lawsuit pending resolution of the Securities Class Action.

On January 20, 2023, a second shareholder derivative lawsuit (the “Karp Lawsuit,” together with the Assad Lawsuit, the “Shareholder Derivative Actions”) was filed, this time in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, by putative stockholder Molly Karp, allegedly on behalf of the Company, again piggy-backing on the Securities Class Action. This complaint, similar to the Assad Lawsuit, is brought against certain current and former officers and directors of the Company, asserting breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting, and contribution claims based on the defendants allegedly having caused or failed to prevent the securities violations alleged in the securities class action. In addition, the complaint asserts a claim under Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, alleging that Berry’s 2022 proxy statement was false and misleading in that it suggested the Company’s internal controls were sufficient and the Board of Directors was adequately overseeing material risks facing the Company when, according to the derivative plaintiff, that was not the case. On February 13, 2023, the court granted the parties’ joint stipulated request to stay the Karp Lawsuit pending resolution of a motion for summary judgment by the defendants in the Securities Class Action. The proposed settlement of the Securities Class Action does not relate to the Shareholder Derivative Actions. The defendants continue to believe the claims in the Shareholder Derivative Actions are without merit and intend to defend vigorously against them, but there can be no assurances as to the outcome. At this time, we are unable to estimate the probability or the amount of liability, if any, related to these matters.
In addition, on or around April 17, 2023, the Company received a stockholder litigation demand that the Board of Directors investigate and commence legal proceedings against certain current and former officers and directors based ostensibly on the same claims asserted in the Shareholder Derivative Actions. The Board of Directors appointed a Demand Review Committee for the purpose of reviewing the demand.