Note 14: Commitments and Contingencies

Periodically, there have been various claims and lawsuits involving the Corporation, such as claims to enforce liens, condemnation proceedings on properties in which the Corporation holds security interests, claims involving the making and servicing of real property loans, employment matters and other issues in the ordinary course of and incidental to the Corporation’s business. These proceedings and the associated legal claims are often contested and the outcome of individual matters is not always predictable. Additionally, in some actions, it is difficult to assess potential exposure because the Corporation is still in the early stages of the litigation. The Corporation is not a party to any pending legal proceedings that it believes would have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, operations or cash flows.

Cannon lawsuit:

On August 6, 2015, a former employee, Christina Cannon, filed a lawsuit called Cannon vs. the Bank in the California Superior Court for the County of San Bernardino (the “Cannon lawsuit”). Cannon seeks to represent a class of all non-exempt employees in a class action lawsuit brought under California’s Unfair Competition Law, Business & Professions Code section 17200. The underlying claims include unpaid overtime (including off-the-clock work), meal and rest period violations, minimum wage violations, and failure to reimburse business expenses. On September 8, 2017, the attorneys for the plaintiffs in the Cannon lawsuit sent notification to the Bank and to the California Labor & Workforce Development Agency informing them of their intent to bring a claim under the Private Attorneys’ General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) on behalf of all non-exempt employees and covering a variety of alleged wage and hour violations. On September 12, 2017, the Bank entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the plaintiffs’ representatives to memorialize an agreement in principle to settle the pending Cannon lawsuit. The Memorandum of Understanding assumes class certification for purposes of the settlement only and provides for an aggregate settlement payment by the Bank of up to $2.8 million, which includes all settlement funds, the class representative enhancement award, settlement administrator’s expenses, any employer-side payroll taxes, and class counsel’s attorneys’ fees and costs. The Bank’s decision to settle this matter was the result of the significant legal costs, distraction from day-to-day operating activities and substantial resources that would be required to defend the Bank in protracted litigation. In addition, the Bank determined that the settlement would reduce the Bank’s potential exposure to damages, penalties, fines and plaintiffs’ legal fees in the event of an unfavorable outcome in a court trial. The settlement includes the dismissal of all claims against the Bank and related parties in the Cannon lawsuit and claim under the PAGA, without any admission of liability or wrongdoing attributed to the Bank. Because of the uncertainty surrounding this litigation, no litigation reserve had been previously established by the Bank resulting in the full $2.8 million settlement expense being recognized in the first quarter of fiscal 2019.

On December 20, 2018, counsel in the Cannon lawsuit filed a Motion for Preliminary Approval of the Settlement in the California Superior Court for the County of San Bernardino. On April 12, 2019, this court granted preliminary approval of the settlement.

On July 24, 2019, the California Superior Court for the County of San Bernardino, California granted final approval of the settlement in the Cannon vs. Bank lawsuit. On July 26, 2019, the final order was signed by this court and on August 6, 2019, the Bank forwarded the settlement amount to the class administrator. The total settlement was reduced to $2.5 million from $2.8 million, resulting in a $296,000 settlement expense recovery which was recognized in the first quarter of fiscal 2020.

The Corporation conducts a portion of its operations in leased facilities and has maintenance contracts under non-cancelable agreements classified as operating leases, which include leases recorded under ASC 842 on liabilities for future lease obligations as well as assets representing the right to use the underlying leased assets (See Note 5 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements).

The following is a schedule of the Corporation’s lease and operating commitments:


	Amount
Year Ending June 30,	(In Thousands)

2021	$	1,712
2022		1,524
2023		672
2024		383
2025		279
Thereafter		281
Total minimum payments required	$	4,851

Lease and operating commitment expense was approximately $1.7 million and $3.9 million for the years ended June 30, 2020 and 2019, respectively.

The Bank sold single-family mortgage loans to unrelated third parties with standard representation and warranty provisions in the ordinary course of its business activities. Under these provisions, the Bank is required to repurchase any previously sold loan for which the representations or warranties of the Bank prove to be inaccurate, incomplete or misleading. In the event of a borrower default or fraud, pursuant to a breached representation or warranty, the Bank may be required to reimburse the investor for any losses suffered. As of both June 30, 2020 and 2019, the Bank maintained a non-contingent recourse liability related to these representations and warranties of $200,000. In addition, the Bank maintained a recourse liability of $70,000 and $50,000 at June 30, 2020 and 2019, respectively, for loans sold to the FHLB – San Francisco under the MPF program.

In the ordinary course of business, the Corporation enters into contracts with third parties under which the third parties provide services on behalf of the Corporation. In many of these contracts, the Corporation agrees to indemnify the third party service provider under certain circumstances. The terms of the indemnity vary from contract to contract and the amount of the indemnification liability, if any, cannot be determined. The Corporation also enters into other contracts and agreements; such as, loan sale agreements, litigation settlement agreements, confidentiality agreements, loan servicing agreements, leases and subleases, among others, in which the Corporation agrees to indemnify third parties for acts by the Corporation’s agents, assignees and/or sub-lessees, and employees. Due to the nature of these indemnification provisions, the Corporation cannot calculate its aggregate potential exposure.

Pursuant to their governing instruments, the Corporation and its subsidiaries provide indemnification to directors, officers, employees and, in some cases, agents of the Corporation against certain liabilities incurred as a result of their service on behalf of or at the request of the Corporation and its subsidiaries. It is not possible for the Corporation to determine the aggregate potential exposure resulting from the obligation to provide this indemnity.