COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

6 Months Ended

Feb. 28, 2015

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and contingencies

NOTE 13. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

In the ordinary course of conducting its business, the Company becomes involved in litigation, administrative proceedings and governmental investigations, including environmental matters. See Note 18, Commitments and Contingencies, to the consolidated financial statements in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014.

On September 18, 2008, the Company was served with a purported class action antitrust lawsuit alleging violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, brought by Standard Iron Works of Scranton, Pennsylvania, against nine steel manufacturing companies, including CMC. The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, alleged that the defendants conspired to fix, raise, maintain and stabilize the price at which steel products were sold in the United States by artificially restricting the supply of such steel products. The lawsuit, which purported to be brought on behalf of a class consisting of all parties who purchased steel products directly from the defendants between January 1, 2005 and September 2008 (collectively, the "Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs"), sought treble damages and costs, including reasonable attorney fees and pre- and post-judgment interest.

On March 14, 2014, the Company entered into a final settlement agreement with the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs. As part of that final settlement, in April 2014, the Company paid approximately $4.0 million to the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs in consideration for the full and final release of all claims of the Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs. The Company maintains that the claims lacked merit and that it has full and complete defenses to all of the claims asserted against it. However, the Company agreed to enter into the settlement agreement to avoid further expense, inconvenience, and distraction of burdensome and protracted litigation. On October 17, 2014, the court granted final approval of the settlement.

On September 24, 2008, a case was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf of a purported nationwide class of indirect purchasers naming the same defendants and containing allegations substantially identical to those of the complaint filed by Standard Iron Works. The lawsuit sought damages, including reasonable attorney fees and other amounts recoverable by statute. Some document production has occurred in the case. Another action was filed in Tennessee state court on behalf of a purported class of indirect purchasers in Tennessee naming the same defendants but seeking recovery for purchases through 2010. The lawsuit sought damages and costs, including reasonable attorney fees and pre- and post-judgment interest. The case has been removed to federal court and was transferred to United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in March 2012. No motion practice or discovery has taken place. The Company believes that the lawsuits are without merit and plans to defend them vigorously. Due to the uncertainty and the information available as of the date of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, the Company cannot reasonably estimate a range of loss relating to these cases.