Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2012

Contingencies [Abstract]

Contingencies

11. Contingencies

On or about March 1, 2005, in an action styled Sarah Cruz, et al v. Town Sports International, d/b/a New York Sports Club , plaintiffs commenced a purported class action against TSI, LLC in the Supreme Court, New York County, seeking unpaid wages and alleging that TSI, LLC violated various overtime provisions of the New York State Labor Law with respect to the payment of wages to certain trainers and assistant fitness managers. On or about June 18, 2007, the same plaintiffs commenced a second purported class action against TSI, LLC in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, seeking unpaid wages and alleging that TSI, LLC violated various wage payment and overtime provisions of the New York State Labor Law with respect to the payment of wages to all New York purported hourly employees. On September 17, 2010, TSI, LLC made motions to dismiss the class action allegations of both lawsuits for plaintiffs' failure to timely file motions to certify the class actions. Oral argument on the motions occurred on November 10, 2010. A decision is still pending. While it is not possible to estimate the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome or a range of loss in the case of an unfavorable outcome to TSI, LLC at this time, the Company intends to contest these cases vigorously. Depending upon the ultimate outcome, these matters may have a material adverse effect on TSI, LLC's and the Company's consolidated results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.

On September 22, 2009, in an action styled Town Sports International, LLC v. Ajilon Solutions , a division of Ajilon Professional Staffing LLC (Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, 602911-09), TSI, LLC brought an action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, against Ajilon for breach of contract, conversion and replevin, seeking, among other things, money damages against Ajilon for breaching its agreement to design and deliver to TSI, LLC a new sports club enterprise management system known as GIMS, including failing to provide copies of the computer source code written for GIMS, related documentation, properly identified requirements documents and other property owned and licensed by TSI, LLC. Subsequently, on October 14, 2009, Ajilon brought a counterclaim against TSI, LLC alleging breach of contract, alleging, among other things, failure to pay outstanding invoices in the amount of $2,900. On March 3, 2011, Ajilon amended its counterclaims to include additional claims for breach of contract and for unjust enrichment, including claims for unspecified additional damages for work allegedly performed by one of its subcontractors. On March 7, 2011, TSI, LLC amended its complaint against Ajilon to add new allegations and claims for fraudulent inducement, negligent misrepresentation, fraud, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (the “additional claims”). On March 28, 2011, Ajilon moved to dismiss the additional claims. The motion is still pending. On February 3, 2012, TSI, LLC filed a motion for partial summary judgment on one of its contract claims. On March 1, 2012, Ajilon filed a cross motion for partial summary judgment seeking to dismiss one of the contract claims of TSI, LLC. The motions are pending. Other than these pending motions, the litigation is nearing the end of the discovery phase. We believe at this time the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome is not probable. TSI, LLC intends to prosecute vigorously its claims against Ajilon and defend against Ajilon's counterclaims.

On February 7, 2007, in an action styled White Plains Plaza Realty, LLC v. TSI, LLC et al., the landlord of one of TSI, LLC's former health and fitness clubs filed a lawsuit in state court against it and two of its health club subsidiaries alleging, among other things, breach of lease in connection with the decision to close the club located in a building owned by the plaintiff and leased to a subsidiary of TSI, LLC, and take additional space in the nearby facility leased by another subsidiary of TSI, LLC. The trial court granted the landlord damages against TSI White Plains, LLC (the “Tenant”) in the amount of approximately $700 including interest and costs (“Initial Award”). TSI, LLC was held to be jointly liable with the Tenant for the amount of approximately $488, under a limited guarantee of the Tenant's lease obligations. The landlord subsequently appealed the trial court's award of damages, and on December 21, 2010, the appellate court reversed, in part, the trial court's decision and ordered the case remanded to the trial court for an assessment of additional damages, of approximately $750 plus interest and costs (the “Additional Award”). On February 7, 2011, the landlord moved for re-argument of the appellate court's decision, seeking additional damages plus attorneys' fees. On April 8, 2011, the appellate court denied the landlord's motion. On August 29, 2011, the Additional Award (amounting to approximately $900), was entered against the Tenant, who has recorded a liability. TSI, LLC does not believe it is probable that it will be held liable to pay for any amount of the Additional Award. Separately, TSI, LLC is party to an agreement with a third-party developer, which by its terms provides indemnification for the full amount of any liability of any nature arising out of the lease described above, including attorneys' fees incurred to enforce the indemnity. In connection with the Initial Award (and in furtherance of the indemnification agreement), TSI, LLC and the developer have entered into an agreement pursuant to which the developer has agreed to pay the amount of the Initial Award in installments over time. The indemnification agreement also covers the Additional Award, and therefore the Tenant has recorded a receivable related to the indemnification. The developer to date has not paid the amount of the Additional Award to the landlord, and the landlord has commenced a special proceeding in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Westchester County, to collect the Additional Award directly from the developer.A motion to dismiss the special proceeding made by the developer was denied by the court on March 13, 2012.

In addition to the litigation discussed above, we are involved in various other lawsuits, claims and proceedings incidental to the ordinary course of business, including personal injury and employee relations claims. The results of litigation are inherently unpredictable. Any claims against us, whether meritorious or not, could be time consuming, result in costly litigation, require significant amounts of management time and result in diversion of significant resources. The results of these other lawsuits, claims and proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty. While it is not feasible to predict the outcome of such proceedings, in the opinion of the Company, either the likelihood of loss is remote or any reasonably possible loss associated with the resolution of such proceedings is not expected to be material either individually or in the aggregate.