COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2023

Environmental Remediation Obligations [Abstract]

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Litigation

The Company, in its normal course of business, is involved in various other claims and legal action. In the opinion of management, the outcome of these claims and actions will not have a material adverse impact upon the financial position of the Company. We are currently party to the following material litigation proceedings:

Doucet litigation:

Vertex Refining LA, LLC (“Vertex Refining LA”), the wholly-owned subsidiary of Vertex Operating was named as a defendant, along with numerous other parties, in five lawsuits filed on or about February 12, 2016, in the Second Parish Court for the Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana, Case No. 121749, by Russell Doucet et. al., Case No. 121750, by Kendra Cannon et. al., Case No. 121751, by Lashawn Jones et. al., Case No. 121752, by Joan Strauss et. al. and Case No. 121753, by Donna Allen et. al. The suits relate to alleged noxious and harmful emissions from our facility located in Marrero, Louisiana. The suits seek damages for physical and emotional injuries, pain and suffering, medical expenses and deprivation of the use and enjoyment of plaintiffs’ homes. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves and oppose the relief sought in the complaints, provided that at this stage of the litigation, the Company has no basis for determining whether there is any likelihood of material loss associated with the claims and/or the potential and/or the outcome of the litigation.

Penthol litigation:

On November 17, 2020, Vertex filed a lawsuit against Penthol LLC (“Penthol”) in the 61st Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, Cause No. 2020-65269, for breach of contract and simultaneously sought a Temporary Restraining Order and Temporary Injunction enjoining Penthol from, among other things, circumventing Vertex in violation of the terms of that certain June 5, 2016 Sales Representative and Marketing Agreement entered into between Vertex Operating and Penthol (the “Penthol Agreement”). Vertex seeks damages, attorney’s fees, costs of court, and all other relief to which it may be entitled.

On February 8, 2021, Penthol filed a complaint against Vertex Operating in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas; Civil Action No. 4:21-CV-416 (the “Complaint”). Penthol’s Complaint sought damages from Vertex Operating for alleged violations of the Sherman Act, breach of contract, business disparagement, and misappropriation of trade secrets under the Defend Trade Secrets Act and Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act. On August 12, 2021, United States District Judge Andrew S. Hanen dismissed Penthol’s Sherman Act claim. Penthol’s remaining claims are pending. Penthol is seeking a declaration that Vertex has materially breached the agreement; an injunction that prohibits Vertex from using Penthol’s alleged trade secrets and requires Vertex to return any of Penthol’s alleged trade secrets; awards of actual, consequential and exemplary damages, attorneys’ fees and costs of court; and other relief to which it may be entitled. Vertex denies Penthol’s allegations in the Complaint. Vertex contends Penthol’s claims are completely without merit, and that Penthol’s termination of the Penthol Agreement was wrongful and resulted in damages to Vertex that it is seeking to recover in the Harris County lawsuit. Further, Vertex contends that Penthol’s termination of the Penthol Agreement constitutes a breach by Penthol under the express terms of the Penthol Agreement, and that Vertex remains entitled to payment of the amounts due Vertex under the Penthol Agreement for unpaid commissions and unpaid performance incentives. Vertex disputes Penthol’s allegations of wrongdoing and intends to vigorously defend itself in this matter. On February 26, 2021, Penthol filed its second amended answer and counterclaims, alleging that Vertex improperly terminated the Penthol Agreement and that Vertex tortiously interfered with Penthol’s prospective and existing business relationships. Vertex denies these allegations and is vigorously defending them.

The parties agreed to move the pending claims and defenses in the Texas state court lawsuit into the federal court lawsuit. Both parties also sought to amend their pleadings to add additional claims. By order dated October 18, 2022, the Judge in the lawsuit, largely granted these requests. As a result, Vertex was granted leave to add Penthol C.V. as a defendant. Penthol was granted leave to add claims for fraud and breach of contract relating to an assignment agreement, and add claims for misappropriation of trade secrets. All pending claims between the parties are now in the federal court action.

The parties recently conducted numerous depositions and substantial document discovery. Vertex has filed a motion for summary judgment, and Penthol has filed a motion for partial summary judgment, both of which are pending.

This case is pending, but is currently set for trial in October 2023.

Class Action:

On April 13, 2023, William C. Passmore filed a putative class action lawsuit against the Company; Benjamin P. Cowart, our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman; and Chris Carlson, our Chief Financial Officer; in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama Southern Division.

The suit alleges that the Company, through Messrs. Cowart and Carlson, issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the projected future financial performance of the Mobile Refinery in 2022. The plaintiff has asserted claims for violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, against all defendants. Plaintiff is seeking multiple forms of relief, including compensatory damages for plaintiff and putative class members in an amount to be established at trial, an award of interest, attorneys’ fees and costs and expenses incurred in the action, and unspecified equitable and injunctive relief. The Company has retained counsel and its assessment of the plaintiff’s allegations is ongoing; however, all defendants intend to dispute and vigorously defend against the allegations.

*****

At this stage of the litigation, we are unable to anticipate the timing of any resolution or the ultimate impact, if any, that the legal proceedings may have on the consolidated financial position, liquidity, results of operations, or cash flows of the Company. As a result, at this time we have not estimated a range of potential exposure for amounts, if any, that might become payable in connection with this matter and reserves have not been established. It is possible that an adverse outcome may have a material adverse impact on the Company.

Environmental Matters

Like other petroleum refiners, we are subject to federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations. These laws generally provide for control of pollutants released into the environment and require responsible parties to undertake remediation of hazardous waste disposal. These governmental entities may also propose or assess fines or require corrective actions for these asserted violations. Except as disclosed below, we do not anticipate that any such matters currently known to management will have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. As of March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022, we reserved $1.4 million for anticipated environment clean up costs.