XML 27 R18.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT  v2.3.0.11
Legal Contingencies
6 Months Ended
Jul. 31, 2011
Legal Contingencies [Abstract]  
LEGAL CONTINGENCIES
NOTE 12 — LEGAL CONTINGENCIES
In the normal course of business, the Company has pending claims and legal proceedings. It is the opinion of the Company’s management, based on information available at this time, that none of the current claims and proceedings will have a material effect on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements other than the matters discussed below. The material amounts of any legal fees expected to be incurred in connection with these matters are accrued when such amounts are estimable.
Altra Matters
GPS was the contractor for engineering, procurement and construction services related to an anhydrous ethanol plant in Carleton, Nebraska (the “Project”). The Project owner was ALTRA Nebraska, LLC (“Altra”). In November 2007, GPS and Altra agreed to a suspension of the Project while Altra sought to obtain financing to complete the Project. By March 2008, financing had not been arranged which terminated the construction contract prior to completion of the Project. In March 2008, GPS filed a mechanic’s lien against the Project in the approximate amount of $23.8 million, which amount included all sums owed to the subcontractors/suppliers of GPS and their subcontractors/suppliers. Several other claimants have also filed mechanic’s liens against the Project. In August 2009, Altra filed for bankruptcy protection. Proceedings resulted in a court-ordered liquidation of Altra’s assets. The incomplete plant was sold at auction in October 2009. Remaining net proceeds of approximately $5.5 million are being held by the court and have not been distributed to Altra’s creditors. The court has separated the lien action into two phases relating to the priority of the claims first and the validity and amount of each party’s lien claim second. The trial relating to the first phase occurred in July 2011; post-trial briefs were filed in August 2011. As the parties wait for the court’s decision, they have begun discovery relating to the second phase.
Delta-T Corporation (“Delta-T”) was a major subcontractor to GPS on the Project. In January 2009, GPS and Delta-T executed a Project Close-Out Agreement (the “Close-Out”) which settled all contract claims between the parties and included a settlement payment in the amount of $3.5 million that GPS made to Delta-T. In the Close-Out, Delta-T also agreed to prosecute any lien claims against Altra, to assign to GPS the first $3.5 million of any resulting proceeds and to indemnify and defend any claims against GPS related to the Project. In addition, GPS received a guarantee from Delta-T’s parent company in support of the indemnification commitment.
In April 2009, one of the subcontractors to Delta-T received an arbitration award in its favor against Delta-T in the amount of approximately $6.8 million, including approximately $662,000 in interest and $2.3 million identified in the award as amounts applied to other projects (the “Judgment Award”). In April 2009, the subcontractor also filed suit in the District Court of Thayer County, Nebraska, in order to recover its claimed amount of $3.6 million unpaid by Delta-T on the Altra project from a payment bond issued to Altra on behalf of GPS. In December 2009, the Judgment Award was confirmed in federal district court in Florida. In February 2010, the subcontractor amended the amount of its complaint filed in the Nebraska court against the payment bond to $6.8 million, plus interest, to match the amount of the Judgment Award. Delta-T has not paid or satisfied any portion of the award and it has abandoned its defense of the surety company. The parties are currently engaged in the discovery phase of this litigation.
The Company intends to vigorously pursue its lien claim against the Altra project as well as to defend this matter for the surety company, to investigate the inclusion of the $2.3 million applied to other projects in the Judgment Award, to demand that Delta-T satisfy its obligations under the Close Out, and/or to enforce the guarantee provided to GPS by Delta-T’s parent company. Due to the early stages of these legal proceedings, assurance cannot be provided by the Company that it will be successful in these efforts. It is reasonably possible that resolution of the matters discussed above could result in a loss with a material negative effect on the Company’s consolidated operating results in a future reporting period. However, at this time, management cannot make an estimate of the amount or range of loss, if any, related to these matters. No provision for loss has been recorded in the condensed consolidated financial statements as of July 31, 2011 related to these matters. If new facts become known in the future indicating that it is probable that a loss has been incurred by GPS and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated by GPS, the impact of the change will be reflected in the consolidated financial statements at that time.
Tampa Bay Nutraceutical Company
On or about September 19, 2007, Tampa Bay Nutraceutical Company, Inc. (“Tampa Bay”) filed a civil action in the Circuit Court of Florida for Collier County against VLI. The current causes of action relate to an order for product issued by Tampa Bay to VLI in June 2007 and sound in (1) breach of contract; (2) promissory estoppel; (3) fraudulent misrepresentation; (4) negligent misrepresentation; (5) breach of express warranty; (6) breach of implied warranty of merchantability; (7) breach of implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose; and (8) non-conforming goods. Tampa Bay alleges compensatory damages in excess of $42 million. Depositions are ongoing.
The Company intends to vigorously defend this litigation as the Company believes it has meritorious defenses. However, it is impracticable to assess the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome of a trial or to estimate a likely range of potential damages, if any, at this stage of the litigation. The ultimate resolution of the litigation with Tampa Bay could result in a material adverse effect on the results of operations of the Company for a future reporting period.