XML 39 R26.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.22.4

Commitments and Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Interest Rate Lock Commitments We have entered into IRLCs with prospective borrowers under our mortgage origination business whereby we commit to lend a certain loan amount under specific terms and at a specific interest rate to the borrower. These commitments are treated as derivatives and are carried at fair value. For additional information regarding our IRLCs, see Note 4 to our consolidated financial statements. Lease Commitments We have entered into various non-cancelable operating lease agreements for certain of our office space and equipment with original lease periods expiring between 2023 and 2032. For additional information regarding our lease agreements, see Note 12 to our consolidated financial statements. Purchase Commitments Purchase commitments primarily include various non-cancelable agreements to purchase content related to our mobile applications and websites and certain cloud computing services. The amounts due for non-cancelable purchase commitments as of December 31, 2022 are as follows (in millions):
| Purchase Obligations
2023 | $ | 79 |
2024 | 21 |
2025 | 9 |
2026 | 2 |
Total future purchase commitments | $ | 111 |
Escrow Balances In conducting our title and escrow operations through Zillow Closing Services, we routinely hold customers’ assets in escrow, pending completion of real estate transactions, and are responsible for the proper disposition of these balances for our customers. Certain of these amounts are maintained in segregated bank accounts and have not been included in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. These balances were not material as of December 31, 2022 and $55 million as of December 31, 2021, and pertain to discontinued operations. Letters of Credit As of December 31, 2022 and 2021, we have outstanding letters of credit of approximately $16 million and $17 million, respectively, which secure our lease obligations in connection with certain of our office space operating leases. Surety Bonds In the course of business, we are required to provide financial commitments in the form of surety bonds to third parties as a guarantee of our performance on and our compliance with certain obligations. If we were to fail to perform or comply with these obligations, any draws upon surety bonds issued on our behalf would then trigger our payment obligation to the surety bond issuer. We have outstanding surety bonds issued for our benefit of approximately $13 million and $12 million as of December 31, 2022 and 2021, respectively. Legal Proceedings We are involved in a number of legal proceedings concerning matters arising in connection with the conduct of our business activities, some of which are at preliminary stages and some of which seek an indeterminate amount of damages. We regularly evaluate the status of legal proceedings in which we are involved to assess whether a loss is probable or there is a reasonable possibility that a loss or additional loss may have been incurred to determine if accruals are appropriate. We further evaluate each legal proceeding to assess whether an estimate of possible loss or range of loss can be made if accruals are not appropriate. For certain cases described below, management is unable to provide a meaningful estimate of the possible loss or range of possible loss because, among other reasons, (i) the proceedings are in preliminary stages; (ii) specific damages have not been sought; (iii) damages sought are, in our view, unsupported and/or exaggerated; (iv) there is uncertainty as to the outcome of pending appeals or motions; (v) there are significant factual issues to be resolved; and/or (vi) there are novel legal issues or unsettled legal theories presented. For these cases, however, management does not believe, based on currently available information, that the outcomes of these proceedings will have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flow. For the matters discussed below, we have not recorded any material accruals as of December 31, 2022 or 2021. In August and September 2017, two purported class action lawsuits were filed against us and certain of our executive officers, alleging, among other things, violations of federal securities laws on behalf of a class of those who purchased our common stock between February 12, 2016 and August 8, 2017. One of those purported class actions, captioned Vargosko v. Zillow Group, Inc. et al, was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The other purported class action lawsuit, captioned Shotwell v. Zillow Group, Inc. et al, was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The complaints allege, among other things, that during the period between February 12, 2016 and August 8, 2017, we issued materially false and misleading statements regarding our business practices. The complaints seek to recover, among other things, alleged damages sustained by the purported class members as a result of the alleged misconduct. In November 2017, an amended complaint was filed against us and certain of our executive officers in the Shotwell v. Zillow Group purported class action lawsuit, extending the beginning of the class period to November 17, 2014. In January 2018, the Vargosko v. Zillow Group purported class action lawsuit was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington and consolidated with the Shotwell v. Zillow Group purported class action lawsuit. In February 2018, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint, and in April 2018, we filed our motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. In October 2018, our motion to dismiss was granted without prejudice, and in November 2018, the plaintiffs filed a second consolidated amended complaint, which we moved to dismiss in December 2018. On April 19, 2019, our motion to dismiss the second consolidated amended complaint was denied. On October 11, 2019, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification which was granted by the court on October 28, 2020. On February 17, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied our petition for review of that decision. On October 21, 2022, the parties jointly filed a notice of settlement with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington to inform the court that the parties have reached an agreement in principle to settle this action. The proposed settlement is subject to the negotiation and execution of a settlement agreement and court approval thereof. The full amount of the settlement payment is expected to be paid by the Company’s insurance carriers under its insurance policy. In October and November 2017 and January and February 2018, four shareholder derivative lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington and the Superior Court of the State of Washington, King County, against certain of our executive officers and directors seeking unspecified damages on behalf of the Company and certain other relief, such as reform to corporate governance practices. The plaintiffs in the derivative suits (in which the Company is a nominal defendant) allege, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties in connection with oversight of the Company’s public statements and legal compliance, and as a result of the breach of such fiduciary duties, the Company was damaged, and defendants were unjustly enriched. Certain of the plaintiffs also allege, among other things, violations of Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and waste of corporate assets. On February 5, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington consolidated the two federal shareholder derivative lawsuits pending in that court (the “Federal Suit”). On February 16, 2018, the Superior Court of the State of Washington, King County, consolidated the two shareholder derivative lawsuits pending in that court (the “State Suit”). The Federal Suit and State Suit were stayed until our motion to dismiss the second consolidated amended complaint in the securities class action lawsuit discussed above was denied in April 2019. On July 8, 2019, the plaintiffs in the Federal Suit filed a consolidated shareholder derivative complaint, which we moved to dismiss on August 22, 2019. On February 28, 2020, our motion to dismiss the Federal Suit was denied. On February 16, 2021, the court in the State Suit matter stayed the action. On March 5, 2021, a new shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against certain of our executive officers and directors seeking unspecified damages on behalf of the Company and certain other relief, such as reform to corporate governance practices, alleging, among other things, violations of federal securities laws. The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington formally consolidated the new lawsuit with the other consolidated Federal Suit pending in that court on June 15, 2021. On November 14, 2022, the parties jointly filed a stipulation with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington informing the court that, among other things, they have agreed in principle to all material terms of a settlement. The proposed settlement is subject to the execution of a settlement agreement and court approval thereof. The full amount of plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and costs associated with the settlement is expected to be paid by the Company’s insurance carriers under its insurance policy. On September 17, 2019, International Business Machines Corporation (“IBM”) filed a complaint against us in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleging, among other things, that the Company has infringed and continues to willfully infringe seven patents held by IBM and seeks unspecified damages, including a request that the amount of compensatory damages be trebled, injunctive relief and costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. On November 8, 2019, we filed a motion to transfer venue and/or to dismiss the complaint. On December 2, 2019, IBM filed an amended complaint, and on December 16, 2019 we filed a renewed motion to transfer venue and/or to dismiss the complaint. The Company’s motion to transfer venue to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington was granted on May 28, 2020. On August 12, 2020, IBM filed its answer to our counterclaims. On September 18, 2020, we filed four Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) petitions before the U.S. Patent and Trial Appeal Board (“PTAB”) seeking the Board’s review of the patentability with respect to three of the patents asserted by IBM in the lawsuit. On March 15, 2021, the PTAB instituted IPR proceedings with respect to two of the three patents for which we filed petitions. On March 22, 2021, the PTAB denied institution with respect to the last of the three patents. On January 22, 2021, the court partially stayed the action with respect to all patents for which we filed an IPR and set forth a motion schedule. On March 8, 2021, IBM filed its second amended complaint. On March 25, 2021, we filed an amended motion for judgment on the pleadings. On July 15, 2021, the court rendered an order in connection with the motion for judgment on the pleadings finding in our favor on two of the four patents on which we filed our motion. On August 31, 2021, the Court ruled that the parties will proceed with respect to the two patents for which it previously denied judgment, and vacated the stay with respect to one of the three patents for which Zillow filed an IPR, which stay was later reinstated by stipulation of the parties on May 18, 2022. On September 23, 2021, IBM filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit with respect to the August 31, 2021 judgment entered, which judgment was affirmed by the Federal Circuit on October 17, 2022. On March 3, 2022, the PTAB ruled on Zillow’s two remaining IPRs finding that Zillow was able to prove certain claims unpatentable, and others it was not. On October 28, 2022, the court found one of the two patents upon which the parties were proceeding in this action as invalid, and dismissed IBM’s claim relating to that patent. Following the court’s ruling, on October 28, 2022, the parties filed a joint stipulation with the court seeking a stay of this action, which was granted by the court on November 1, 2022. On November 25, 2022, Zillow filed a motion to join an IPR petition within Ebates Performance Mktg., Inc. d/b/a Rakuten Rewards v. Int’l Bus. Machs. Corp., IPR2022-00646 concerning the final remaining patent in this action. We deny the allegations of any wrongdoing and intend to vigorously defend the claims in the lawsuit. There is a reasonable possibility that a loss may be incurred related to this matter; however, the possible loss or range of loss is not estimable. On July 21, 2020, IBM filed a second action against us in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, alleging, among other things, that the Company has infringed and continues to willfully infringe five patents held by IBM and seeks unspecified damages. On September 14, 2020, we filed a motion to dismiss the complaint filed in the action, to which IBM responded by the filing of an amended complaint on November 5, 2020. On December 18, 2020, we filed a motion to dismiss IBM’s first amended complaint. On December 23, 2020, the Court issued a written order staying this case in full. On July 23, 2021, we filed an IPR with the PTAB with respect to one patent included in the second lawsuit. On October 6, 2021, the stay of this action was lifted, except for proceedings relating to the one patent for which we filed an IPR. On December 1, 2021, the Court dismissed the fourth claim asserted by IBM in its amended complaint. On December 16, 2021 Zillow filed a motion to dismiss the remaining claims alleged in IBM’s amended complaint. On March 9, 2022, the Court granted Zillow’s motion to dismiss in full, dismissing IBM’s claims related to all the patents asserted by IBM in this action, except for the one patent for which an IPR was still pending. On March 10, 2022, the PTAB rendered its decision denying Zillow’s IPR on the one remaining patent, for which this case continues to remain stayed. On August 1, 2022, IBM filed an appeal of the Court’s ruling with respect to two of the dismissed patents. Zillow’s responsive brief was filed on September 30, 2022, and IBM’s reply brief was filed on November 4, 2022. We deny the allegations of any wrongdoing and intend to vigorously defend the claims in the lawsuit. There is a reasonable possibility that a loss may be incurred related to this matter; however, the possible loss or range of loss is not estimable. On November 16, 2021, November 19, 2021 and January 6, 2022, three purported class action lawsuits were filed against us and certain of our executive officers, alleging, among other things, violations of federal securities laws on behalf of a class of those who purchased our stock between August 7, 2020 and November 2, 2021. The three purported class action lawsuits, captioned Barua v. Zillow Group, Inc. et al., Silverberg v. Zillow Group, et al. and Hillier v. Zillow Group, Inc. et al. were brought in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington and were consolidated on February 16, 2022. On May 12, 2022, the plaintiffs filed their amended consolidated complaint which alleges, among other things, that we issued materially false and misleading statements regarding our Zillow Offers business. The complaints seek to recover, among other things, alleged damages sustained by the purported class members as a result of the alleged misconduct. We moved to dismiss the amended consolidated complaint on July 11, 2022, plaintiffs filed their opposition to the motion to dismiss on September 2, 2022, and we filed a reply in support of the motion to dismiss on October 11, 2022. On December 7, 2022, the court rendered its decision granting defendants’ motion to dismiss, in part, and denying the motion, in part. On January 23, 2023, the defendants filed their answer to the consolidated complaint. We intend to deny the allegations of wrongdoing and intend to vigorously defend the claims in this consolidated lawsuit. We do not believe that a loss related to this consolidated lawsuit is probable. On March 10, 2022, May 5, 2022 and July 20, 2022 shareholder derivative suits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington and on July 25, 2022, a shareholder derivative suit was filed in the Superior Court of the State of Washington, King County (the “2022 State Suit”), against us and certain of our executive officers and directors seeking unspecified damages on behalf of the Company and certain other relief, such as reform to corporate governance practices. The plaintiffs (including the Company as a nominal defendant) allege, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by failing to maintain an effective system of internal controls, which purportedly caused the losses the Company incurred when it decided to wind down Zillow Offers operations. Plaintiffs also allege, among other things, violations of Section 14(a) and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, insider trading and waste of corporate assets. On June 1, 2022 and September 14, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington issued orders consolidating the three federal derivative suits and staying the consolidated action until further order of the court. On September 15, 2022, the Superior Court of the State of Washington entered a temporary stay in the 2022 State Suit. Upon the filing of the defendants’ answer in the related securities class action lawsuit on January 23, 2023, the stay in the 2022 State Suit was lifted. The defendants intend to deny the allegations of wrongdoing and vigorously defend the claims in these lawsuits. We do not believe that a loss related to these lawsuits is probable. In addition to the matters discussed above, from time to time, we are involved in litigation and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business. Although we cannot be certain of the outcome of any such litigation or claims, nor the amount of damages and exposure that we could incur, we currently believe that the final disposition of such matters will not have a material effect on our business, financial position, results of operations or cash flow. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors. Indemnifications In the ordinary course of business, we enter into contractual arrangements under which we agree to provide indemnification of varying scope and terms to business partners and other parties with respect to certain matters, including, but not limited to, losses arising out of the breach of such agreements and out of intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties. In addition, we have agreements that indemnify certain issuers of surety bonds against losses that they may incur as a result of executing surety bonds on our behalf. For our indemnification arrangements, payment may be conditional on the other party making a claim pursuant to the procedures specified in the particular contract. Further, our obligations under these agreements may be limited in terms of time and/or amount, and in some instances, we may have recourse against third parties for certain payments. In addition, we have indemnification agreements with certain of our directors and executive officers that require us, among other things, to indemnify them against certain liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers. The terms of such obligations may vary.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6491277&loc=d3e6429-115629 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI https://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI https://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration