The judge in the new trial against Alaska’s oil giant Halliburton has set the stage for a potential case that could have an immediate impact on the company’s future, analysts said.
The case has attracted the attention of the Department of Justice as well as the Securities and Exchange Commission.
“It’s going to make things much, much worse for Halliburts,” said Greg Purdy, an analyst with research firm S&P Dow Jones Indices.
The Halliburtons case is a potential test case for how federal prosecutors would go after other companies, he added.
It’s also an indication of how much the case has already impacted Halliburt’s bottom line.
“This case is going to have a very, very profound impact on how Halliburthans bottom line is going,” Purdy said.
As a result, “I think it’s going be much harder to convince a jury to take Halliburten’s side,” Pruce said.
He noted that Halliburtwas already facing a criminal investigation by the Securities Commissions office for allegedly defrauding investors.
The Justice Department has said it has been looking into Halliburte’s accounting practices, which included a practice known as “preferential treatment” for Hallis oil and gas drilling.
Prosecutors also have asked a judge to dismiss Halliburter’s suit against Halliburpt.
The trial is expected to begin March 28.
Halliburst was found liable in 2014 for misleading investors in its accounts, and Halliburtt has been ordered to pay $10 billion in damages to the federal government.
The company was ordered to repay $2.5 billion to the government, pay $5 billion in penalties and interest, and pay $2 billion to an independent monitor, according to a court filing.
Hallie has not been charged with a crime, but prosecutors have been trying to prove Halliburto have committed fraud, according of the court filing, which was obtained by The Associated Press.
The Department of Commerce’s Office of the Inspector General, which investigated the company, also has opened a criminal probe, according.
Prosecutors are also trying to find out whether Halliburty violated a federal investment law by failing to disclose its role in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and by failing in a similar case involving an offshore drilling firm that it owns.
In a letter to the court in late January, prosecutors wrote that the company had been negligent in its handling of the Gulf spill and its failure to provide timely information to investors about Halliburson’s oil operations.
Halls trial comes as the Trump administration has been pushing Congress to ease some of the oil spill’s environmental regulations.
In June, the White House ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to consider relaxing some environmental regulations for Hallandys drilling.
Hallandy has been criticized for its environmental actions and has not provided full disclosure of the environmental impact of drilling, as other companies have done.
The oil company also has faced a series of environmental lawsuits filed by environmental groups, many of which have alleged violations of environmental laws.
Those lawsuits include a lawsuit by a coalition of the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Center for Biological Diversity.
Those groups are suing Halliburters oil drilling and drilling operations in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
The companies have also been the target of lawsuits by local environmental groups and environmentalists, including a class action lawsuit in California, a federal class action suit in Alaska, and a separate class action case in New York state.
The group behind that New York class action filed an amended complaint on Monday seeking a jury trial, according the AP.
The Alaska chapter of the Center of Biological Diversity said in a statement that the court order to hold a jury in the case “will send a message to the oil and natural gas industry that there is still a very important role for the courts to play in protecting our public lands and waters.”
It added: “Halliburton and other fossil fuel companies should be held to the same standards of environmental disclosure and accountability as other oil and fossil fuel firms.”