Legal Proceedings	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2012
Legal Proceedings	9. Legal Proceedings The Company is subject to legal proceedings, claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of these matters is currently not determinable, management does not expect that the ultimate costs to resolve these matters will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. On August 4, 2011, CARBO Ceramics Inc. was named as a defendant in a civil lawsuit filed by C-E Minerals, Inc. (“C-E”) in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division. C-E alleged that a mutual non-competition provision contained in a Raw Material Requirements Agreement between C-E and CARBO Ceramics Inc., dated June 1, 2003, was invalid under federal antitrust law and applicable state law. On March 13, 2012, the Court granted a preliminary injunction in favor of C-E. The Company and C-E subsequently entered into a settlement agreement by which both parties agreed not to enforce the covenant against the other, and resolved the claims asserted in the lawsuit. As a result, the lawsuit has been dismissed. There was no material impact to the financial statements as a result of this lawsuit. On February 9, 2012, the Company and two of its officers, Gary A. Kolstad and Ernesto Bautista III, were named as defendants in a purported class-action lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “February SDNY Lawsuit”), brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased the Company’s Common Stock between October 27, 2011 and January 26, 2012 (the “Relevant Time Period”). The suit alleges violations of the federal securities laws arising from statements concerning the Company’s business operations and business prospects that were made during the Relevant Time Period and requests unspecified damages and costs. On April 10, 2012, a second purported class-action lawsuit was filed against the same defendants in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased or sold CARBO Ceramics Inc. option contracts during the Relevant Time Period (the “April SDNY Lawsuit”). On April 19, 2012, a third purported class-action lawsuit was filed against the same defendants in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, which was also brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased the Company’s Common Stock during the Relevant Time Period (the “April SDTX Lawsuit” and collectively with the April SDNY Lawsuit and the February SDNY Lawsuit, the “Federal Securities Lawsuits”). The April SDNY Lawsuit and the April SDTX Lawsuit allege substantially similar claims as the February SDNY Lawsuit and request unspecified damages and costs. On March 1, 2012, the Directors of the Company and Mr. Bautista were named as defendants in a purported derivative action lawsuit brought on behalf of the Company by a stockholder in District Court in Harris County, Texas (the “Harris County Lawsuit”). The suit alleges various breaches of fiduciary duty and other duties by the defendants that generally are related to the February SDNY Lawsuit. The derivative lawsuit requests unspecified damages and costs. The parties to this lawsuit have entered into an agreement to stay further proceedings pending the outcome of a motion to dismiss the Federal Securities Lawsuits. While each of the Federal Securities Lawsuits and the Harris Country Lawsuit are in their preliminary stages, the Company does not believe they have merit, and plans to vigorously contest and defend against them. The Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome or duration of these lawsuits.

9. Legal Proceedings

The Company is subject to legal proceedings, claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of these matters is currently not determinable, management does not expect that the ultimate costs to resolve these matters will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

On August 4, 2011, CARBO Ceramics Inc. was named as a defendant in a civil lawsuit filed by C-E Minerals, Inc. (“C-E”) in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division. C-E alleged that a mutual non-competition provision contained in a Raw Material Requirements Agreement between C-E and CARBO Ceramics Inc., dated June 1, 2003, was invalid under federal antitrust law and applicable state law. On March 13, 2012, the Court granted a preliminary injunction in favor of C-E. The Company and C-E subsequently entered into a settlement agreement by which both parties agreed not to enforce the covenant against the other, and resolved the claims asserted in the lawsuit. As a result, the lawsuit has been dismissed. There was no material impact to the financial statements as a result of this lawsuit.

On February 9, 2012, the Company and two of its officers, Gary A. Kolstad and Ernesto Bautista III, were named as defendants in a purported class-action lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “February SDNY Lawsuit”), brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased the Company’s Common Stock between October 27, 2011 and January 26, 2012 (the “Relevant Time Period”). The suit alleges violations of the federal securities laws arising from statements concerning the Company’s business operations and business prospects that were made during the Relevant Time Period and requests unspecified damages and costs. On April 10, 2012, a second purported class-action lawsuit was filed against the same defendants in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased or sold CARBO Ceramics Inc. option contracts during the Relevant Time Period (the “April SDNY Lawsuit”). On April 19, 2012, a third purported class-action lawsuit was filed against the same defendants in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, which was also brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased the Company’s Common Stock during the Relevant Time Period (the “April SDTX Lawsuit” and collectively with the April SDNY Lawsuit and the February SDNY Lawsuit, the “Federal Securities Lawsuits”). The April SDNY Lawsuit and the April SDTX Lawsuit allege substantially similar claims as the February SDNY Lawsuit and request unspecified damages and costs.

On March 1, 2012, the Directors of the Company and Mr. Bautista were named as defendants in a purported derivative action lawsuit brought on behalf of the Company by a stockholder in District Court in Harris County, Texas (the “Harris County Lawsuit”). The suit alleges various breaches of fiduciary duty and other duties by the defendants that generally are related to the February SDNY Lawsuit. The derivative lawsuit requests unspecified damages and costs. The parties to this lawsuit have entered into an agreement to stay further proceedings pending the outcome of a motion to dismiss the Federal Securities Lawsuits.

While each of the Federal Securities Lawsuits and the Harris Country Lawsuit are in their preliminary stages, the Company does not believe they have merit, and plans to vigorously contest and defend against them.

The Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome or duration of these lawsuits.