COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2021

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

8. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Legal Proceedings

The nature of CoreCivic's business results in claims and litigation alleging that it is liable for damages arising from the conduct of its employees, offenders or others.  The nature of such claims includes, but is not limited to, claims arising from employee or offender misconduct, medical malpractice, employment matters, property loss, contractual claims, including claims regarding compliance with contract performance requirements, and personal injury or other damages resulting from contact with CoreCivic's facilities, personnel or offenders, including damages arising from an offender's escape or from a disturbance at a facility.  CoreCivic maintains insurance to cover many of these claims, which may mitigate the risk that any single claim would have a material effect on CoreCivic's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows, provided the claim is one for which coverage is available.  The combination of self-insured retentions and deductible amounts means that, in the aggregate, CoreCivic is subject to substantial self-insurance risk.  

Based upon management's review of the potential claims and outstanding litigation, and based upon management's experience and history of estimating losses, and taking into consideration CoreCivic's self-insured retention amounts, management believes a loss in excess of amounts already recognized would not be material to CoreCivic's financial statements.  Adversarial proceedings and litigation are, however, subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable decisions and rulings resulting from legal proceedings could occur which could have a material impact on CoreCivic's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows for the period in which such decisions or rulings occur, or future periods.  Expenses associated with legal proceedings may also fluctuate from quarter to quarter based on changes in CoreCivic's assumptions, new developments, or by the effectiveness of CoreCivic's litigation and settlement strategies.  

CoreCivic records a liability in the consolidated financial statements for loss contingencies when a loss is known or considered probable, and the amount can be reasonably estimated.  If the reasonable estimate of a known or probable loss is a range, and no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other, the minimum amount of the range is accrued.  If a loss is reasonably possible but not known or probable, and can be reasonably estimated, the estimated loss or range of loss is disclosed.  When determining the estimated loss or range of loss, significant judgment is required to estimate the amount and timing of a loss to be recorded.  Any receivable for insurance recoveries is recorded separately from the corresponding litigation reserve, and only if recovery is determined to be probable and the amount of payment can be determined.  CoreCivic does not accrue for anticipated legal fees and costs but expenses those items as incurred.  

ICE Detainee Labor and Related Matters.

On May 31, 2017, two former U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") detainees, who were detained at the Company's Otay Mesa Detention Center (“OMDC”) in San Diego, California, filed a class action lawsuit against the Company in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The complaint alleged that the Company forces detainees to perform labor under threat of punishment in violation of state and federal anti-trafficking laws and that OMDC’s Voluntary Work Program (“VWP”) violates state labor laws including state minimum wage law. ICE requires that CoreCivic offer and operate the VWP in conformance with ICE standards and ICE prescribes the minimum rate of pay for VWP participants. The Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, exemplary damages, restitution, penalties, and interest as well as declaratory and injunctive relief on behalf of former and current detainees. On April 1, 2020, the district court certified a nationwide anti-trafficking claims class of former and current detainees at all CoreCivic ICE detention facilities. It also certified a state law class of former and current detainees at the Company’s ICE detention facilities in California. The court did not certify any claims for injunctive or declaratory relief. On March 10, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted CoreCivic's petition to appeal the class certification ruling.  Since this case was filed, four similar lawsuits have been filed. A Maryland case was dismissed on September 27, 2019, and the dismissal was affirmed on appeal. Two suits filed in Georgia and Texas do not allege minimum wage violations. A second California suit concerning the Otay Mesa facility is stayed pending class proceedings in the first. The Company disputes these allegations and intends to take all necessary steps to vigorously defend itself against all claims.

Due to the stage of this proceeding, the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome, nor can it estimate the amount of loss or range of loss, if any, that may result.  As a result, the Company has not recorded an accrual relating to this matter at this time, as losses are not considered probable or reasonably estimable at this stage of these lawsuits.

Shareholder Litigation.

In a memorandum to the BOP dated August 18, 2016, the Department of Justice ("DOJ") directed that, as each contract with privately operated prisons reaches the end of its term, the BOP should either decline to renew that contract or substantially reduce its scope in a manner consistent with law and the overall decline of the BOP's inmate population.  Following the release of the August 18, 2016 DOJ memorandum, a purported securities class action lawsuit was filed on August 23, 2016 against the Company and certain of its current and former officers in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee (the "District Court"), captioned Grae v. Corrections Corporation of America et al., Case No. 3:16-cv-02267.  The lawsuit was brought on behalf of a putative class of shareholders who purchased or acquired the Company's securities between February 27, 2012 and August 17, 2016. The Plaintiffs were seeking compensatory damages and costs incurred in connection with the lawsuit. In general, the lawsuit alleged that, during this timeframe, the Company's public statements were false and/or misleading regarding the purported operational, programming, and cost efficiency factors cited in the DOJ memorandum and, as a result, the Company's stock price was artificially inflated.  The lawsuit alleged that the publication of the DOJ memorandum on August 18, 2016 revealed the alleged fraud, causing the per share price of the Company's stock to decline, thereby causing harm to the putative class of shareholders.  

On April 16, 2021, the Company reached an agreement in principle to settle the lawsuit.  The monetary terms of the settlement include a payment by the Company of $56.0 million in return for a dismissal of the case with prejudice and a full release of all claims against all defendants, including the Company and its current and former officers.  The settlement agreement, which was approved by the District Court on November 8, 2021, contains no admission of liability, wrongdoing, or responsibility by any of the defendants, including the Company.  As a result of the settlement, the Company recognized an expense of $54.3 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2021, which was net of the remaining insurance available under the Company's policies.  

The Company is also named along with several of its directors in six derivative lawsuits which raise similar allegations to those raised in the Grae securities litigation.  Those suits had been stayed pending the outcome of the Grae litigation.  The Company believes these lawsuits are entirely without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them.  The Company is unable at this stage to reasonably predict the outcome of these matters or estimate the amount of loss or range of loss, if any, that may result.  For this reason, the Company does not consider losses probable or reasonably estimable at this stage and has not recorded an accrual relating to the derivative lawsuits.