Halliburton 2011 Annual Report Download - page 109

94
Damages for the cases tried in the MDL proceeding, including punitive damages, are expected to
be tried following the three-phase portion of the trial described above. Under ordinary MDL procedures,
such cases would, unless waived by the respective parties, be tried in the courts from which they were
transferred into the MDL. It remains unclear, however, what impact the overlay of the Limitation Action
will have on where these matters are tried. Document discovery and depositions among the parties to the
MDL are ongoing. It is unclear how the judge will address the DOJ’ s civil action for alleged violations of
the CWA and the OPA.
In April and May 2011, certain defendants in the proceedings described above filed numerous
cross claims and third party claims against certain other defendants. BP Exploration and BP America
Production Company filed claims against us seeking subrogation and contribution, including with respect
to liabilities under the OPA, and direct damages, and alleging negligence, gross negligence, fraudulent
conduct, and fraudulent concealment. Transocean filed claims against us seeking indemnification, and
subrogation and contribution, including with respect to liabilities under the OPA and for the total loss of the
Deepwater Horizon, and alleging comparative fault and breach of warranty of workmanlike performance.
Anadarko filed claims against us seeking tort indemnity and contribution, and alleging negligence, gross
negligence and willful misconduct, and MOEX Offshore 2007 LLC (MOEX), who has an approximate
10% interest in the Macondo well, filed a claim against us alleging negligence. Cameron International
Corporation (Cameron) (the manufacturer and designer of the blowout preventer), M-I Swaco (provider of
drilling fluids and services, among other things), Weatherford U.S. L.P. and Weatherford International, Inc.
(together, Weatherford) (providers of casing components, including float equipment and centralizers, and
services), and Dril-Quip, Inc. (Dril-Quip) (provider of wellhead systems), each filed claims against us
seeking indemnification and contribution, including with respect to liabilities under the OPA in the case of
Cameron, and alleging negligence. Additional civil lawsuits may be filed against us. In addition to the
claims against us, generally the defendants in the proceedings described above filed claims, including for
liabilities under the OPA and other claims similar to those described above, against the other defendants
described above. BP has since announced that it has settled those claims between it and each of MOEX,
Weatherford, Anadarko, and Cameron.
In April 2011, we filed claims against BP Exploration, BP p.l.c. and BP America Production
Company (BP Defendants), M-I Swaco, Cameron, Anadarko, MOEX, Weatherford, Dril-Quip, and
numerous entities involved in the post-blowout remediation and response efforts, in each case seeking
contribution and indemnification and alleging negligence. Our claims also alleged gross negligence and
willful misconduct on the part of the BP Defendants, Anadarko, and Weatherford. We also filed claims
against M-I Swaco and Weatherford for contractual indemnification, and against Cameron, Weatherford
and Dril-Quip for strict products liability, although the court has since issued orders dismissing all claims
asserted against Dril-Quip and Weatherford in the MDL. We filed our answer to Transocean’ s Limitation
petition denying Transocean’ s right to limit its liability, denying all claims and responsibility for the
incident, seeking contribution and indemnification, and alleging negligence and gross negligence.
Judge Barbier has issued an order, among others, clarifying certain aspects of law applicable to the
lawsuits pending in his court. The court ruled that: (1) general maritime law will apply and therefore
dismissed all claims brought under state law causes of action; (2) general maritime law claims may be
brought directly against defendants who are non-“responsible parties” under the OPA with the exception of
pure economic loss claims by plaintiffs other than commercial fishermen; (3) all claims for damages,
including pure economic loss claims, may be brought under the OPA directly against responsible parties;
and (4) punitive damage claims can be brought against both non-responsible parties under general maritime
law and responsible parties under the OPA. As discussed above, with respect to the ruling that claims for
damages may be brought under the OPA against responsible parties, we have not been named as a
responsible party under the OPA, but BP Exploration has filed a claim against us for contribution with
respect to liabilities incurred by BP Exploration under the OPA.