XML 51 R19.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
Commitments and Contingencies
 9 Months Ended
Sep. 07, 2012
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies

Litigation

Except as described below, we are not involved in any material litigation nor, to our knowledge, is any material litigation pending or threatened against us. We are involved in routine litigation arising out of the ordinary course of business, all of which is expected to be covered by insurance and is not expected to have a material adverse impact on our financial condition or results of operations.

Allerton Loan

We hold the senior mortgage loan secured by the Allerton Hotel, located in downtown Chicago, Illinois. The loan matured in January 2010 and is in default. In May 2011, the borrower under the loan filed for bankruptcy protection in the Northern District of Illinois under chapter 11 of Title 11 of the U.S. Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq., as amended.  The senior mortgage loan is secured by substantially all of the assets of the borrower, including the Allerton Hotel. The filing of the bankruptcy case had the effect of, among other things, automatically staying the foreclosure proceedings that had been previously filed against the borrower.  The borrower filed a plan of reorganization with the bankruptcy court in December 2011 and a disclosure statement with the bankruptcy court in January 2012 (together, the "Plan"). In March 2012, the Plan was approved for submission to the creditors for a vote to approve the Plan. The creditors approved the Plan and the Plan is subject to a confirmation hearing, which began on July 23, 2012, but was not completed and is scheduled to resume on October 29, 2012. While we continue to vigorously pursue our rights in the bankruptcy case, the potential outcome is uncertain.

In August 2011, we filed a claim in New York State court under a so-called “bad boy guarantee” against an affiliate of the borrower for certain damages incurred as a result of the bankruptcy filing. In January 2012, the New York State court granted summary judgment in our favor, finding the guarantor liable for legal fees incurred by the Company arising out of the bankruptcy filing and we are preparing for a hearing on the reasonableness of the amount of fees. No assurance can be given, however, that we will be successful in collecting the amounts due to us upon a determination of the amount of damages due to us.

Los Angeles Airport Marriott Litigation

During 2011, we accrued $1.7 million for our contribution to the settlement of litigation involving the Los Angeles Airport Marriott. The settlement was recorded as a corporate expense during the year ended December 31, 2011. The Company and certain other defendants reached a tentative settlement of the matter, which involved claims by certain employees at the Los Angeles Airport Marriott.  During the fiscal quarter ended June 15, 2012, we paid our contribution to the settlement into escrow, and the settlement is pending final approval by the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County.

Performance Termination Provisions Under Management Agreements

Our management agreements provide us with termination rights upon a manager's failure to meet certain financial performance criteria. Our termination rights may, in certain cases, be waived in exchange for consideration from the manager, such as a cure payment. Based on our forecast and the hotel's budget, the Oak Brook Hills Marriott Resort is at risk of failing its performance test at the end of 2012.

The Orlando Airport Marriott failed the performance test under the management agreement at the end of 2011. In July 2012, we amended the management agreement, which reduces the annual base management fee paid to the manager for each of fiscal years 2012 and 2013 from 3% to 2% of gross revenues should the hotel's annual debt service amount exceed hotel operating profit with respect to each such fiscal year. Should we exercise our termination rights based on the hotel failing the performance test in 2012 and 2013, we would be required to repay the manager the 1% unpaid base management fees, if any, resulting from such fiscal years.