XML 37 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.19.2

Commitments and Contingencies | 6 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2019
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | 15. Commitments and Contingencies Future minimum operating lease payments under non-cancellable operating leases as of December 31, 2018 were as follows (in millions):
|  | Operating Leases
2019 |  | $ | 22.0 |
2020 |  | 18.7 |
2021 |  | 16.4 |
2022 |  | 8.8 |
2023 |  | 6.8 |
Thereafter |  | 20.3 |
Total obligations |  | $ | 93.0 |
Litigation The Company is subject to claims and legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business. Such matters are inherently uncertain, and there can be no guarantee that the outcome of any such matter will be decided favorably to the Company or that the resolution of any such matter will not have a material adverse effect upon the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. The Company does not believe that any of such pending claims and legal proceedings will have a material adverse effect on its Consolidated Financial Statements. The Company records a liability in its Consolidated Financial Statements for these matters when a loss is known or considered probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. The Company reviews these estimates each accounting period as additional information is known and adjusts the loss provision when appropriate. If a matter is both probable to result in a liability and the amounts of loss can be reasonably estimated, the Company estimates and discloses the possible loss or range of loss to the extent necessary for its Consolidated Financial Statements not to be misleading. If the loss is not probable or cannot be reasonably estimated, a liability is not recorded in its Consolidated Financial Statements. Based on a review of the current facts and circumstances with counsel in each of the matters disclosed, management has provided for what is believed to be a reasonable estimate of loss exposure. While acknowledging the uncertainties of litigation, management believes that the ultimate outcome of litigation will not have a material effect on its financial position and will defend itself vigorously. CGI Producer Litigation On November 28, 2016, CGI, a subsidiary of the Company, Great American Financial Resource, Inc. ("GAFRI"), American Financial Group, Inc., and CIGNA Corporation were served with a putative class action complaint filed by John Fastrich and Universal Investment Services, Inc. in The United States District Court for the District of Nebraska alleging breach of contract, tortious interference with contract and unjust enrichment. The plaintiffs contend that they were agents of record under various CGI policies and that CGI allegedly instructed policyholders to switch to other CGI products and caused the plaintiffs to lose commissions, renewals, and overrides on policies that were replaced. The complaint also alleges breach of contract claims relating to allegedly unpaid commissions related to premium rate increases implemented on certain long-term care insurance policies. Finally, the complaint alleges breach of contract claims related to vesting of commissions. On August 21, 2017, the Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ tortious interference with contract claim. CGI believes that the remaining allegations and claims set forth in the complaint are without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them. The case was set for voluntary mediation, which occurred on January 26, 2018. The Court stayed discovery pending the outcome of the mediation. On February 12, 2018, the parties notified the Court that mediation did not resolve the case and that the parties’ discussions regarding a possible settlement of the action were still ongoing. The Court held a status conference on March 22, 2018, during which the parties informed the Court that settlement negotiations remain ongoing. Nonetheless, the Court entered a scheduling order setting the case for trial during the week of October 15, 2019. Meanwhile, the parties’ continued settlement negotiations led to a tentative settlement. On February 4, 2019, the plaintiffs executed a class settlement agreement with CGI, Loyal American Life Insurance Company, American Retirement Life Insurance Company, GAFRI, and American Financial Group, Inc. (collectively, the "Defendants"). The settlement agreement, which would require GAFRI to make a $1.25 million payment on behalf of the Defendants, is subject to final Court approval. On February 4, 2019, the plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the class settlement in a parallel action in the Southern District of Ohio, Case No. 17-CV-00615-SJD, which motion was granted by the Southern District of Ohio on April 2, 2019. Meanwhile, the case pending before the District of Nebraska was stayed on February 6, 2019, pending final approval of the class action settlement in the Ohio action. The final settlement hearing, previously scheduled on July 23, 2019, has been continued and is now scheduled on September 17, 2019. Further, the Company and CGI are seeking defense costs and indemnification for plaintiffs’ claims from GAFRI and Continental General Corporation ("CGC") under the terms of an Amended and Restated Stock Purchase Agreement ("SPA") related to the Company’s acquisition of CGI in December 2015. GAFRI and CGC rejected CGI’s demand for defense and indemnification and, on January 18, 2017, the Company and CGI filed a Complaint against GAFRI and CGC in the Superior Court of Delaware seeking a declaratory judgment to enforce their indemnification rights under the SPA. On February 23, 2017, GAFRI answered CGI’s complaint, denying the allegations. Meanwhile, the parties’ continued settlement negotiations resulted in a settlement agreement in the Delaware action. The settlement agreement, which requires CGI to contribute $250,000 to the settlement payment made by GAFRI in the class action, is contingent on the final approval of the class action settlement in the Ohio action. VAT assessment On February 20, 2017, and on August 15, 2017, the Company's subsidiary, ICS, received notices from Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs office in the U.K. (the "HMRC") indicating that it was required to pay certain Value-Added Taxes ("VAT") for the 2015 and 2016 tax years. ICS disagrees with HMRC’s assessments on technical and factual grounds and intends to dispute the assessed liabilities and vigorously defend its interests. We do not believe the assessment to be probable and expect to prevail based on the facts and merits of our existing VAT position. DBMG Class Action On November 6, 2014, a putative stockholder class action complaint challenging the tender offer by which HC2 acquired approximately 721,000 of the issued and outstanding common shares of DBMG was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, captioned Mark Jacobs v. Philip A. Falcone, Keith M. Hladek, Paul Voigt, Michael R. Hill, Rustin Roach, D. Ronald Yagoda, Phillip O. Elbert, HC2 Holdings, Inc., and Schuff International, Inc., Civil Action No. 10323 (the "Complaint"). On November 17, 2014, a second lawsuit was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, captioned Arlen Diercks v. Schuff International, Inc. Philip A. Falcone, Keith M. Hladek, Paul Voigt, Michael R. Hill, Rustin Roach, D. Ronald Yagoda, Phillip O. Elbert, HC2 Holdings, Inc., Civil Action No. 10359. On February 19, 2015, the court consolidated the actions (now designated as Schuff International, Inc. Stockholders Litigation) and appointed lead plaintiffs' counsel. The currently operative complaint is the Complaint filed by Mark Jacobs. The Complaint alleges, among other things, that in connection with the tender offer, the individual members of the DBMG Board of Directors and HC2, the now-controlling stockholder of DBMG, breached their fiduciary duties to members of the plaintiff class. The Complaint also purports to challenge a potential short-form merger based upon plaintiff’s expectation that the Company would cash out the remaining public stockholders of DBMG following the completion of the tender offer. The Complaint seeks rescission of the tender offer and/or compensatory damages, as well as attorney’s fees and other relief. The defendants filed answers to the Complaint on July 30, 2015. The parties have been exploring alternative frameworks for a potential settlement. There can be no assurance that a settlement will be finalized or that the Delaware Courts would approve such a settlement even if the parties enter into a settlement agreement. If a settlement cannot be reached, the Company believes it has meritorious defenses and intends to vigorously defend this matter. Global Marine Dispute GMSL is in dispute with Alcatel-Lucent Submarine Networks Limited ("ASN") related to a Marine Installation Contract between the parties, dated March 11, 2016 (the "ASN Contract"). Under the ASN Contract, GMSL's obligations were to install and bury an optical fiber cable in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. As of the date hereof, neither party has commenced legal proceedings. Pursuant to the ASN Contract any such dispute would be governed by English law and would be required to be brought in the English courts in London. ASN has alleged that GMSL committed material breaches of the ASN Contract, which entitles ASN to terminate the ASN Contract, take over the work themselves, and claim damages for their losses arising as a result of the breaches. The alleged material breaches include failure to use appropriate equipment and procedures to perform the work and failure to accurately estimate the amount of weather downtime needed. ASN has indicated to GMSL it has incurred $38.2 million in damages and $1.2 million in liquidated damages for the period from September 2016 to October 2016, plus interest and costs. GMSL believes that it has not breached the terms and conditions of the contract and also believes that ASN has not properly terminated the contract in a manner that would allow it to make a claim. However, ASN has ceased making payments to GMSL and as of June 30, 2019, the total sum of GMSL invoices raised and issued were $17.0 million, of which $8.1 million were settled by ASN and the balance of $8.9 million remained at risk. On July 25, 2019, GMSL and ASN reached a settlement agreement wherein ASN agreed to pay GMSL $3.5 million in full settlement of the GMSL invoices and the parties agreed to release each other from all current and future claims with respect to the ASN Contract. Tax Matters Currently, the Canada Revenue Agency ("CRA") is auditing a subsidiary previously held by the Company. The Company intends to cooperate in audit matters. To date, CRA has not proposed any specific adjustments and the audit is ongoing.

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 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -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