Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies The Company is subject, from time to time, to various types of third-party legal claims or litigation that arise in the ordinary course of business, including, but not limited to, property loss claims, personal injury or other damages resulting from contact with the Company’s properties. These claims and lawsuits and any resulting damages are generally covered by the Company's insurance policies. The Company accrues for legal costs associated with loss contingencies when these costs are probable and reasonably estimable. While the resolution of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty, management does not expect, based on currently available information, that the final outcome of any pending claims or legal proceedings will have a material adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of the Company. As previously disclosed in our Quarterly Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2017, on September 6, 2013, a former tenant at the Legacy Corner Apartments property in Midwest City, Oklahoma filed a complaint in the District Court of Oklahoma County against the Company and other named defendants, Case No. CJ-2013-5011, alleging premises liability and negligent maintenance. At December 31, 2016, based on the facts and circumstances of this case, the Company believed it had a viable defense and was prepared to defend the suit vigorously. Due to the pendency of the Company's defenses and insurance policies, together with the inherent difficulty and uncertainty of predicting the outcome of litigation generally, the Company did not believe a risk of loss associated with compensatory damages was probable. Furthermore, the Company did not believe a risk of loss associated with punitive damages, which would be awarded due to gross negligence, was probable based on the information known, nor did the Company know what an estimated range of uninsured punitive damages could be. Therefore, at December 31, 2016, no loss contingency amounts related to this case had been accrued. The jury trial commenced on April 3, 2017. On April 12, 2017, the jury entered a verdict against the Company’s subsidiary and the other named defendants in favor of the plaintiff of $6,000 in compensatory damages and $6,000 in punitive damages. The compensatory portion of the verdict is fully insured by the Company’s insurance policies. However, the Company's insurance carrier served the Company with a reservation of rights letter stating that insurance coverage may not be provided for punitive damages awarded in this case. As a result, the Company’s potential loss contingency exposure was $6,000. During the quarter ended June 30, 2017, one of the Company's insurance carriers provided a $1,000 payment to the plaintiff. On July 27, 2017, the plaintiff asserted a demand against the Company’s subsidiary and the other named defendants to settle the lawsuit through arbitration in exchange for an amount less than the total damages awarded. Subsequent to negotiations with the Company's insurance carrier, the Company recorded a $2,447 credit to other expenses related to the partial reversal of its previously recorded loss contingency of $3,000 as of March 31, 2017, to reflect the $553 portion of the final settlement paid by the Company during three months ended September 30, 2017. Leasing commitments As of September 30, 2017, one of the Company’s multi-tenant retail assets is subject to a ground lease. The Company records ground rent expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. The lease requires rental payments or rental payment increases based upon the appraised value of the property at specified dates, increases in pricing indexes, or certain financial calculations based on the operations of the respective property. In addition, the Company has non-cancelable operating leases for office space used in its business. The Company recognized rent expense associated with ground leases of $93 and $160 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, respectively, and $67 and $242 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016, respectively. The Company recognized rent expense associated with office space leases of $527 and $1,198 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, respectively, and $359 and $1,052 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016, respectively. Contingent consideration In connection with the purchase of The Parke, the Company entered into an agreement with the seller whereby up to $17,129 in additional consideration would become payable to the seller upon rent commencement of certain tenants. On August 25, 2017, the Company closed on a portion of the earn-out, resulting in cash transferred to the seller of $7,415. The remaining accrued contingent consideration of $9,714 has been included in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2017. The Company recognized the contingent consideration related to the asset upon acquisition and included the initial measurement of the contingent considerations in the cost of the acquired assets.

Commitments and Contingencies

The Company is subject, from time to time, to various types of third-party legal claims or litigation that arise in the ordinary course of business, including, but not limited to, property loss claims, personal injury or other damages resulting from contact with the Company’s properties. These claims and lawsuits and any resulting damages are generally covered by the Company's insurance policies. The Company accrues for legal costs associated with loss contingencies when these costs are probable and reasonably estimable. While the resolution of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty, management does not expect, based on currently available information, that the final outcome of any pending claims or legal proceedings will have a material adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of the Company.

As previously disclosed in our Quarterly Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2017, on September 6, 2013, a former tenant at the Legacy Corner Apartments property in Midwest City, Oklahoma filed a complaint in the District Court of Oklahoma County against the Company and other named defendants, Case No. CJ-2013-5011, alleging premises liability and negligent maintenance. At December 31, 2016, based on the facts and circumstances of this case, the Company believed it had a viable defense and was prepared to defend the suit vigorously. Due to the pendency of the Company's defenses and insurance policies, together with the inherent difficulty and uncertainty of predicting the outcome of litigation generally, the Company did not believe a risk of loss associated with compensatory damages was probable. Furthermore, the Company did not believe a risk of loss associated with punitive damages, which would be awarded due to gross negligence, was probable based on the information known, nor did the Company know what an estimated range of uninsured punitive damages could be. Therefore, at December 31, 2016, no loss contingency amounts related to this case had been accrued.

The jury trial commenced on April 3, 2017. On April 12, 2017, the jury entered a verdict against the Company’s subsidiary and the other named defendants in favor of the plaintiff of $6,000 in compensatory damages and $6,000 in punitive damages. The compensatory portion of the verdict is fully insured by the Company’s insurance policies. However, the Company's insurance carrier served the Company with a reservation of rights letter stating that insurance coverage may not be provided for punitive damages awarded in this case. As a result, the Company’s potential loss contingency exposure was $6,000. During the quarter ended June 30, 2017, one of the Company's insurance carriers provided a $1,000 payment to the plaintiff.

On July 27, 2017, the plaintiff asserted a demand against the Company’s subsidiary and the other named defendants to settle the lawsuit through arbitration in exchange for an amount less than the total damages awarded. Subsequent to negotiations with the Company's insurance carrier, the Company recorded a $2,447 credit to other expenses related to the partial reversal of its previously recorded loss contingency of $3,000 as of March 31, 2017, to reflect the $553 portion of the final settlement paid by the Company during three months ended September 30, 2017.

Leasing commitments

As of September 30, 2017, one of the Company’s multi-tenant retail assets is subject to a ground lease. The Company records ground rent expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. The lease requires rental payments or rental payment increases based upon the appraised value of the property at specified dates, increases in pricing indexes, or certain financial calculations based on the operations of the respective property. In addition, the Company has non-cancelable operating leases for office space used in its business.

The Company recognized rent expense associated with ground leases of $93 and $160 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, respectively, and $67 and $242 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016, respectively. The Company recognized rent expense associated with office space leases of $527 and $1,198 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, respectively, and $359 and $1,052 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016, respectively.

Contingent consideration

In connection with the purchase of The Parke, the Company entered into an agreement with the seller whereby up to $17,129 in additional consideration would become payable to the seller upon rent commencement of certain tenants. On August 25, 2017, the Company closed on a portion of the earn-out, resulting in cash transferred to the seller of $7,415. The remaining accrued contingent consideration of $9,714 has been included in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2017. The Company recognized the contingent consideration related to the asset upon acquisition and included the initial measurement of the contingent considerations in the cost of the acquired assets.