XML 36 R18.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.8.0.1

Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Contingencies | CONTINGENCIES In re Rayonier Inc. Securities Litigation Following the Company’s November 10, 2014 earnings release and filing of the restated interim financial statements for the quarterly periods ended March 31, 2014 and June 30, 2014 (the “November 2014 Announcement”), shareholders of the Company filed five putative class actions against the Company and Paul G. Boynton, Hans E. Vanden Noort, David L. Nunes, and H. Edwin Kiker arising from circumstances described in the November 2014 Announcement, entitled respectively:
• | Sating v. Rayonier Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-01395; filed November 12, 2014 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida;
• | Keasler v. Rayonier Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-01398, filed November 13, 2014 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida;
• | Lake Worth Firefighters’ Pension Trust Fund v. Rayonier Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-01403, filed November 13, 2014 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida;
• | Christie v. Rayonier Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-01429, filed November 21, 2014 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida; and
• | Brown v. Rayonier Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-08986, initially filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and later transferred to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida and assigned as Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-01474.
On January 9, 2015, the five securities actions were consolidated into one putative class action entitled In re Rayonier Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. 3:14-cv-01395-TJC-JBT, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants made false and/or misleading statements in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The plaintiffs sought unspecified monetary damages and attorneys’ fees and costs. Two shareholders, the Pension Trust Fund for Operating Engineers and the Lake Worth Firefighters’ Pension Trust Fund, moved for appointment as lead plaintiff on January 12, 2015, which was granted on February 25, 2015. On April 7, 2015, the plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint (the “Consolidated Complaint”). In the Consolidated Complaint, plaintiffs added allegations as to and added as a defendant N. Lynn Wilson, a former officer of Rayonier. With the filing of the Consolidated Complaint, David L. Nunes and H. Edwin Kiker were dropped from the case as defendants. Defendants timely filed Motions to Dismiss the Consolidated Complaint on May 15, 2015. After oral argument on Defendants' motions on August 25, 2015, the Court dismissed the Consolidated Complaint without prejudice, allowing plaintiffs leave to refile. Plaintiffs filed the Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) on September 25, 2015, which continued to assert claims against the Company, as well as Ms. Wilson and Messrs. Boynton and Vanden Noort. Defendants timely filed Motions to Dismiss the Amended Complaint on October 26, 2015. The court denied those motions on May 20, 2016. On December 31, 2016, the case continued to be in the discovery phase and the Company could not determine whether there was a reasonable likelihood a material loss had been incurred nor could the range of any such loss be estimated. On March 13, 2017, the Company reached an agreement in principle to settle the case and all parties executed a term sheet memorializing such agreement. The parties executed and filed with the Court the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement on April 12, 2017 (the “Settlement Agreement”), which Settlement Agreement included the material terms contained in the term sheet executed on March 13. Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, which was subject to Court approval and requests for exclusion by members of the settlement class, the Company agreed to cause certain of its directors’ and officers’ liability insurance carriers to fund a settlement payment to the class of $73 million (the “Settlement Fund”). The insurance carriers fully funded the Settlement Fund by deposits in an escrow account as required by the Settlement Agreement. On September 19, 2017, the court held the final fairness hearing as to the settlement. The amounts agreed to on March 13, 2017, including the realized amount funded by the insurance carriers, were reflected in the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements as of September 30, 2017. On October 5, 2017, the court entered orders approving the settlement and plan of distribution, dismissing the case against all defendants with prejudice and awarding Plaintiffs’ counsel certain fees and cost reimbursements to be paid from the Settlement Fund. Derivative Claims On November 26, 2014, December 29, 2014, January 26, 2015, February 13, 2015, and May 12, 2015, the Company received separate letters from shareholders requesting that the Company investigate or pursue derivative claims against certain officers and directors related to the November 2014 Announcement (“Derivative Claims”). Although these demands do not identify any claims against the Company, the Company has certain obligations to advance expenses and provide indemnification to certain current and former officers and directors of the Company. The Company has also incurred expenses as a result of costs arising from the investigation of the claims alleged in the various demands. At this preliminary stage, the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be predicted, nor can the range of potential expenses the Company may incur as a result of the obligations identified above be estimated. On October 13, 2017, counsel for all five shareholders involved in the Derivative Claims filed a complaint in the name of one of the shareholders from whom the Company received a request to investigate. That case is pending in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida and is styled Molloy v. Boynton, et al., Civil Action No. 3:17-cv-01157-TJC-MCR. The complaint alleges breaches of fiduciary duties and unjust enrichment and names as defendants, former officers Paul G. Boynton, Hans E. Vanden Noort and N. Lynn Wilson, and former directors C. David Brown, II, Mark E. Gaumond, James H. Miller, Thomas I. Morgan and Ronald Townsend. The Company has also been named as a defendant in various other lawsuits and claims arising in the normal course of business. While the Company has procured reasonable and customary insurance covering risks normally occurring in connection with its businesses, it has in certain cases retained some risk through the operation of large deductible insurance plans, primarily in the areas of executive risk, property, automobile and general liability. These pending lawsuits and claims, either individually or in the aggregate, are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flow.

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://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration