COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES


(A)	Legal Proceedings

In the normal course of business, the Company is involved or may become involved in various legal actions in which claims for alleged economic and punitive damages have been or may be asserted, some for substantial amounts. In recent years, carriers offering life insurance and annuity products have faced litigation, including class action lawsuits, alleging improper product design, improper sales practices, and similar claims. As discussed below, the Company has been a defendant over the past several years in two such class action lawsuits. Given the uncertainty involved in these types of actions, the ability to make a reliable evaluation of the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome or an estimate of the amount of or range of potential loss is endemic to the particular circumstances and evolving developments of each individual matter on it own merits.

The Company was a defendant in a class action lawsuit initially filed on September 17, 2004, in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles. The California state court certified a class consisting of certain California policyholders age 65 and older alleging violations under California Business and Professions Code section 17200. The court additionally certified a subclass of 36 policyholders alleging fraud against their agent, and vicariously against the Company. The California Insurance Department intervened in this case asserting that the Company violated California insurance laws. The parties to this case became involved in court-ordered mediation and ongoing negotiations. On February 22, 2010, the Company reported in a Form 8-K filing a settlement agreement with the plaintiffs and plaintiff in intervention providing a settlement benefit of approximately $17 million which was included in the Company's legal accrual provision at December 31, 2009. The settlement agreement was given final court approval at a Fairness Hearing on August 20, 2010. Including attorney's fees, policy benefits, and other considerations, the Company paid out approximately $22.4 million in the third and fourth quarters of 2010.

The Company is currently a defendant in a second class action lawsuit pending as of June 12, 2006, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The case is titled In Re National Western Life Insurance Deferred Annuities Litigation. The complaint asserts claims for RICO violations, Financial Elder Abuse, Violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, et seq, Violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17500, et seq, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Aiding and Abetting Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Fraudulent Concealment, Cal. Civ. Code 1710, et seq, Breach of the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and Unjust Enrichment and Imposition of Constructive Trust. On July 12, 2010 the Court certified a nationwide class of policyholders under the RICO allegation and a California class under all of the remaining causes of action except breach of fiduciary duty. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses in this cause and intends to vigorously defend itself against the asserted claims. Therefore, no amounts have been provided in the consolidated financial statements of the Company as of June 30, 2011 for this matter.

In addition to the two class action lawsuits described above, the Company is the named defendant in the case of Sheila Newman vs. National Western Life Insurance Company, which alleged mishandling of policyholder funds by an agent. On February 3, 2010, the 415th Judicial District Court of Parker County in Weatherford, Texas, entered a Final Judgment against the Company of approximately $208,000 including actual damages of $113,000 and amounts for attorney's fees, and prejudgment interest on the actual damages. In addition, the Final Judgment included $150 million for exemplary damages. The Company is vigorously defending this case and has appealed the Final Judgment to the Court of Appeals in Ft. Worth, Texas. The Company's counsel believes the Final Judgment is inconsistent with current state and federal laws and intends to establish on appeal that it is not liable for Newman's actual or exemplary damages. Further, Company counsel have advised of existing law that governs limits of awards of exemplary damages including: (1) a Texas statute that limits awards of exemplary damages to two times the amount of actual damages, and (2) case law from both the Texas Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court setting the outer limits of exemplary damages to single-digit ratios between actual and exemplary damages, but usually no more than 3 or 4 times the actual damages. The Company has accrued $0.6 million at June 30, 2011 for this matter inasmuch as it believes the record shows there is no basis for an award of exemplary damages in excess of these amounts.

In addition to amounts accrued for incurred and unpaid legal fees, the amounts accrued in the financial statements at June 30, 2011 of $0.6 million for the foregoing lawsuits represent estimates made by the Company based upon current information and are subject to change as facts and circumstances change and develop. Although there can be no assurances, at the present time, the Company does not anticipate that the ultimate liability arising from such other potential, pending, or threatened legal actions will have a material adverse effect on the financial condition or operating results of the Company.

The Company had been involved in litigation as the plaintiff in a matter pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (“District Court”) against defendant, Western National Life Insurance Company and its parent company, AGC Life Insurance Company. The matter dealt with the alleged infringement of registered trademarks held by the Company. On March 25, 2011, the parties executed a Memorandum of Understanding on Settlement (“Memorandum”) under which the Company was to receive a settlement payment of $4 million no later than June 30, 2011. This amount has been received and is included in Other revenues, net of attorney fees, in the financial statements. The Memorandum also outlined corrective measures to be followed by the parties. The Memorandum required notification to the District Court of the settlement and calls for the parties to agree upon a final written confidential settlement agreement containing the essential terms outlined in the Memorandum.