Note 9 - Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2023

Notes to Financial Statements

Legal Matters and Contingencies [Text Block]

9. Contingencies

Except as set forth below, we know of no material, existing or pending, legal proceedings against our Company, nor are we involved as a plaintiff in any material proceeding or pending litigation. There are no proceedings in which any of our directors, officers or affiliates, or any registered or beneficial stockholder, is an adverse party or has a material interest adverse to our interest.

GreenPower Litigation

On December 17, 2019, GreenPower Motor Company Inc., a public company incorporated under the laws of British Columbia (“GreenPower”), of which Phillip W. Oldridge, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, , previously served as a senior officer and a member of its board of directors, filed a notice of civil claim, captioned GreenPower Motor Company Inc. v. Phillip Oldridge et al., Action No. S-1914285, in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, against Phillip Oldridge, his trust, EVTDS and certain other companies affiliated therewith. The notice of civil claim alleges that Mr. Oldridge breached certain fiduciary duties owed to GreenPower by working with certain parties in direct competition with and at the expense of GreenPower. GreenPower alleges that the Company conspired with Mr. Oldridge to build its business, competing products and unfairly compete with GreenPower. GreenPower seeks general damages, special damages and punitive damages, plus interest and costs against EVTDS. Fact discovery, through document disclosure and examinations for discoveries, in this matter remain ongoing. The Company has denied all claims, believes the lawsuit is without merit, and intends to vigorously defend the action.

On or about July 18, 2021, GreenPower and GP Greenpower Industries Inc., (collectively “the GreenPower entities”) filed a counterclaim against David Oldridge, Phillip Oldridge, the Company and other companies in Supreme Court of British Columbia Action No. S207532. The counterclaim alleges that David Oldridge, Phillip Oldridge, the Company and other companies committed the tort of abuse of process by causing 42 Design Works Inc., to commence a lawsuit against the GreenPower entities. Additionally, GreenPower entities also advanced claims against David Oldridge, Phillip Oldridge, the Company and other companies for conspiracy. The pleadings in this lawsuit have not closed and we intend to vigorously defend the counterclaim.

On February 8, 2022, GreenPower Motor Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and GreenPower Motor Company Inc., a Canadian Corporation, filed a complaint captioned GreenPower Motor Company, Inc. v. Phillip Oldridge, et al., Case No. 5:22-cv-00252 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint names the Company and the following affiliated entities, officers, or directors: Phillip Oldridge, Envirotech Electric Vehicles Inc., Envirotech Drive Systems Incorporated US, Envirotech Drive Systems Incorporated Canada, Sue Emry, David Oldridge, S&P Financial and Corporate Services, Inc. GreenPower also named the Phillip Oldridge Trust and a purported entity called EVT Motors, Inc., but has since dismissed those parties. The complaint seeks an undisclosed amount of compensatory and punitive damages, injunctive relief to prevent the alleged anti-Competitive behavior, restitution for harm, an award of treble damages, and associate fees and costs. The complaint’s allegations are centered around the same assertions in the pending Canadian litigation.  On May 10, 2022, the Company, together with other defendants, filed a Motion to Dismiss and/or Stay the lawsuit pending the outcome of the Canadian litigation. The Court issued stay of this case pending resolution of parallel litigation in Canada between similar parties. GreenPower and defendants have agreed that the U.S. GreenPower case will not proceed while Canadian litigation is pending. The Company believes that the lawsuit is without merit and intends to vigorously defend the action.

Mollik Litigation - Resolved

On August 23, 2018, a purported class action lawsuit captioned M.D. Ariful Mollik v. ADOMANI, Inc. et al., Case No. RIC 1817493, was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside against the Company, certain of its executive officers, Edward R. Monfort, the former Chief Technology Officer and a former director of ADOMANI, Inc., and the two underwriters of the Company’s offering of common stock under Regulation A in June 2017. This complaint alleges that documents related to our offering of common stock under Regulation A in June 2017 contained materially false and misleading statements and that all defendants violated Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act, and that the Company and the individual defendants violated Section 15 of the Securities Act, in connection therewith. The plaintiff seeks on behalf of himself and all class members: (i) certification of a class under California substantive law and procedure; (ii) compensatory damages and interest in an amount to be proven at trial; (iii) reasonable costs and expenses incurred in this action, including counsel fees and expert fees; (iv) awarding of rescission or recessionary damages; and (v) equitable relief at the discretion of the court.

On June 19, 2023, counsel for Electric Drivetrains and counsel for the Company participated in a mediation at which Electric Drivetrains and the Company executed a binding term sheet to completely resolve this matter. On July 18, 2023, Electric Drivetrains and all Defendants executed a Settlement Agreement for complete resolution of the case and dismissal against all Defendants with prejudice. No Company proceeds will be used to resolve this matter. On September 30, 2023, the Court dismissed this action with prejudice and the matter is completely resolved.

Brooks Litigation

On June 19, 2019, Alan K. Brooks, an ADOMANI investor, filed a complaint, captioned Alan K. Brooks v. ADOMANI, Inc., et al., Case No. 1-CV-349153 in the Superior Court of California for the County of Santa Clara, against the Company, certain of the Company’s executive officers and directors, two of the underwriters of the Company’s offering of common stock under Regulation A in June 2017, and certain of the underwriters’ personnel, among others (the “Brooks Case”). The complaint alleges that the Company and other defendants breached the terms of an agreement between Mr. Brooks and the Company by refusing to release 1,320,359 shares of ADOMANI, Inc. stock to Mr. Brooks. Mr. Brooks seeks damages of $13,500,000.00 plus interest and attorney’s fees. On September 20, 2019, Mr. Brooks filed his first amended complaint (“FAC”) reasserting his breach of contract claim and alleging five additional claims for (i) violations of Cal. Corp. Code Section 25401, (ii) fraud, negligent misrepresentation, (iv) elder abuse, and (v) unfair competition. The parties participated in mediation during which they resolved the matter. On March 7, 2022, the Court issued an Order approving the settlement and the parties are in the process of effectuating its terms. This case has now been completely dismissed.