XML 51 R10.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v2.4.0.8

Commitments And Contingencies | 6 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2014
Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments And Contingencies | NOTE 5 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES The Company and its subsidiaries are involved in certain legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business and, as required, have accrued an estimate of the probable costs for the resolution of those claims for which the occurrence of loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. These estimates have been developed in consultation with counsel and are based upon an analysis of potential results, assuming a combination of litigation and settlement strategies. It is possible, however, that future results of operations for any particular period could be materially affected by changes in the Company's assumptions or the effectiveness of the Company's strategies related to these proceedings. Additionally, due to the inherent uncertainty of litigation, there can be no assurance that the resolution of any particular claim or proceeding would not have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition or results of operations. Although the Company is involved in a variety of legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business, a large portion of the Company's litigation arises in the following contexts: commercial disputes; defamation matters; employment and benefits related claims; governmental fines; intellectual property claims; and tax disputes. Los Angeles Litigation In 2008, Summit Media, LLC, one of the Company's competitors, sued the City of Los Angeles (the “City”), Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. and CBS Outdoor in Los Angeles Superior Court (Case No. BS116611) challenging the validity of a settlement agreement that had been entered into in November 2006 among the parties. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. had taken down existing billboards and converted 83 existing signs from static displays to digital displays pursuant to modernization permits issued through an administrative process of the City. The Los Angeles Superior Court ruled in January 2010 that the settlement agreement constituted an ultra vires act of the City and nullified its existence, but did not invalidate the modernization permits issued to Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. and CBS. All parties appealed the ruling by the Los Angeles Superior Court to the Court of Appeal for the State of California, Second Appellate District, Division 8. On December 10, 2012, the Court of Appeal issued an order upholding the Superior Court's finding that the settlement agreement was ultra vires and remanding the case to the Superior Court for the purpose of invalidating the modernization permits issued to Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. and CBS for the digital displays that were the subject of the settlement agreement. On January 22, 2013, Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. filed a petition with the California Supreme Court requesting its review of the matter, and the Supreme Court denied that petition on February 27, 2013. On April 12, 2013, the Los Angeles Superior Court invalidated 82 digital modernization permits issued to Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. (77 of which displays were operating at the time of the ruling) and 13 issued to CBS and ordered that the companies turn off the electrical power to affected digital displays by the close of business on April 15, 2013. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. has complied with the order. On April 16, 2013, the Court conducted further proceedings during which it held that it was not invalidating two additional digital modernization permits that Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. had secured through a special zoning plan and confirmed that its April 12 order invalidated only digital modernization permits – no other types of permits the companies may have secured for the signs at issue. Summit Media, LLC filed a further motion requesting that the Court order the demolition of the 82 sign structures on which the now-invalidated digital signs operated, as well as the invalidation of several other permits for traditional signs allegedly issued under the settlement agreement. At a hearing held on November 22, 2013, the Court denied Summit Media, LLC's demolition motion by allowing the 82 sign structures and their LED faces to remain intact, thus allowing Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. to seek permits under the existing City sign code to either wrap the LED faces with vinyl or convert the LED faces to traditional static signs. The Court further confirmed the invalidation of all permits issued under the settlement agreement. In anticipation of this order, Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. had removed six static billboard facings solely permitted under the settlement agreement. At a hearing held on January 21, 2014, the Court denied Summit Media, LLC's motion for attorney's fees on the basis that Summit Media, LLC had a substantial financial interest in the outcome of the litigation and, therefore, was not entitled to fees under California's private attorney general statute. On March 12, 2014, Summit Media, LLC filed n otices of a ppeal of the orders denying Summit Media, LLC's fee petition and denying in part Summit Media, LLC's demolition motion. NOTE 6 - GUARANTEES As of June 30, 2014, Clear Channel had outstanding surety bonds and commercial standby letters of credit of $45.5 million and $113.3 million, respectively, of which $0.2 million of letters of credit were cash secured. Letters of credit in the amount of $2.0 million are collateral in support of surety bonds and these amounts would only be drawn under the letter of credit in the event the associated surety bonds were funded and Clear Channel did not honor its reimbursement obligation to the issuers. These letters of credit and surety bonds relate to various operational matters including insurance, bid, and performanc e bonds as well as other items. As of June 30, 2014, Clear Channel had outstanding bank guarantees of $59.5 million related to international subsidiaries, of which $15.8 million were backed by cash collateral.

X
- 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 210 -SubTopic 10 -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.25) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 825 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 460 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 8 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6398077&loc=d3e12565-110249 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=25496072&loc=d3e14435-108349 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 2 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6394976&loc=d3e25287-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration