View:
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 8-K
CURRENT REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
DATE OF REPORT (date of earliest event reported)
November 29, 2001
Halliburton Company
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
State or other Commission IRS Employer
jurisdiction File Number Identification
of incorporation Number
Delaware 1-3492 No. 75-2677995
3600 Lincoln Plaza
500 North Akard Street
Dallas, Texas 75201-3391
(Address of principal executive offices)
Registrant's telephone number,
including area code - 214/978-2600
Page 1 of 3 Pages
INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN REPORT
Item 5. Other Events
The registrant may, at its option, report under this item any events, with
respect to which information is not otherwise called for by this form, that the
registrant deems of importance to security holders.
Halliburton Company announced that on November 29, 2001, a Texas district
court in Orange, Texas entered a judgment against its subsidiary, Dresser
Industries, Inc., on a $65 million jury verdict rendered in September 2001 in
favor of five plaintiffs following a trial of several weeks. Dresser believes
that the trial court committed numerous errors, including the application of
Alabama law and its evidentiary rulings during the trial. Additionally, the
trial court denied Dresser the right to present evidence that the alleged
illnesses of the plaintiffs were not caused by Dresser products, but instead
could have been caused by the products of other companies which had previously
settled with the plaintiffs. Dresser intends to appeal this judgement and
believes that the trial evidence did not support the verdict and that its legal
defenses will result in judgment on appeal in Dresser's favor.
The same district court also entered three additional judgments against
Dresser in the aggregate amount of $35.7 million in favor of 100 other asbestos
plaintiffs. These judgments related to an alleged breach of purported settlement
agreements signed earlier this year by a New Orleans lawyer hired by
Harbison-Walker Refractories Company, which had been defending Dresser pursuant
to the agreement by which Harbison-Walker was spun-off by Dresser in 1992. These
settlement agreements purportedly bind Harbison-Walker Refractories Company as
the obligated party, not Dresser. Dresser intends to appeal these three
judgements on the grounds that it was not a party to the settlement agreements
and it did not authorize anyone to settle on its behalf. Dresser believes that
these judgments are contrary to applicable law and that its appeal will be
successful.
Page 2 of 3Pages
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
HALLIBURTON COMPANY
Date: December 3, 2001 By: /s/ Susan S. Keith
--------------------------------------
Susan S. Keith
Vice President and Secretary
Page 3 of 3 Pages