Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Aug. 03, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 7. Commitments and Contingencies We are involved in ongoing legal and regulatory proceedings. Other than those described in the following paragraphs, there were no material changes to our disclosures of commitments and contingencies from our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February 2, 2013 and our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 4, 2013. *Consumer Class Action Claims* Massachusetts Zip Code Claims Relying in part on the California Supreme Court decision, an additional purported class action lawsuit was filed on May 20, 2011 against the Company: Melissa Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc. in the U.S. District Court-District of Massachusetts, alleging violation of a Massachusetts statute regarding the collection of personally identification information in connection with a credit card transaction. On March 11, 2013, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled on certified questions on the interpretation of the statute and remanded the case to the U.S. District Court for further proceedings. Following the Judicial Court’s decision, an additional purported class action lawsuit asserting the same allegations in Tyler was filed in the U.S. District Court-District of Massachusetts by Susan D’Esposito, and the two cases have been consolidated. On August 12, 2013, a tentative settlement that is subject to Court approval was reached for an amount that will not have a material effect on our Consolidated Financial Statements. *Governmental inquiries and related matters* Non-U.S. trust inquiry In early 2005, the District Attorney’s office of the County of New York and the SEC opened inquiries concerning non-U.S. trusts that directly or indirectly held shares of Michaels common stock and common stock options. On July 29, 2010, the SEC filed a civil enforcement action in federal district court for the Southern District of New York against Charles Wyly, Sam Wyly, the Wylys’ attorney—Michael French, and others alleging, among other things, violations of various federal securities laws, including those governing ownership reporting and trading of securities, in connection with the non-U.S. trusts and their subsidiaries. Additional information may be obtained at the SEC’s website. Sam Wyly, the estate of Charles Wyly and Mr. French, also a former director of the Company, have requested indemnification from the Company for certain legal costs with respect to these matters. The Company has resolved all claims with regards to Sam Wyly and the estate of Charles Wyly for an immaterial amount. On April 12, 2012, Mr. French filed a lawsuit against the Company and the non-U.S. trusts in the District Court of Dallas County, Texas. The matter was dismissed as to the non-U.S. trusts. Mr. French seeks damages from the Company for breach of contract, attorneys’ fees and costs related to the Company’s alleged indemnification obligations to Mr. French and attorneys’ fees and costs related to the lawsuit. On August 9, 2013, the dispute was settled for an amount that will not have a material effect on our Consolidated Financial Statements. *General* In addition to the litigation discussed above, we are, and in the future, may be involved in various other lawsuits, claims and proceedings incident to the ordinary course of business. 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. ASC 450, Contingencies, governs the disclosure and recognition of loss contingencies, including potential losses from litigation and regulatory matters. It imposes different requirements for the recognition and disclosure of loss contingencies based on the likelihood of occurrence of the contingent future event or events. It distinguishes among degrees of likelihood using the following three terms: “probable”, meaning that “the future event or events are likely to occur”; “remote”, meaning that “the chance of the future event or events occurring is slight”; and “reasonably possible”, meaning that “the chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less than likely”. In accordance with ASC 450, the Company accrues for a loss contingency when we conclude that the likelihood of a loss is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. When the loss cannot be reasonably estimated we estimate the range of amounts, and if no amount in the range constitutes a better estimate than any other amount, we accrue for the amount at the low end of the range. We adjust our accruals from time to time as we receive additional information, but the loss we incur may be significantly greater than or less than the amount we have accrued. We disclose loss contingencies if there is at least a reasonable possibility that a material loss has been incurred. No accrual or disclosure is required for losses that are remote. For some of the matters disclosed above, as well as other matters previously disclosed in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Company is currently able to estimate a reasonably possible loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued (if any). For some of the matters included within this estimation, an accrual has been made because a loss is believed to be both probable and reasonably estimable, but an exposure to loss exists in excess of the amount accrued; in these cases, the estimate reflects the reasonably possible range of loss in excess of the accrued amount. For other matters included within this estimation, no accrual has been made because a loss, although estimable, is believed to be reasonably possible, but not probable; in these cases the estimate reflects the reasonably possible loss or range of loss within the ranges identified. For the various ranges identified, the aggregate of these estimated amounts is approximately $10 million, which is also inclusive of amounts accrued by the Company. For other matters disclosed above or as previously disclosed in the Company’s filings with the SEC, the Company is not currently able to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss, and has indicated such. Many of these matters remain in preliminary stages (even in some cases where a substantial period of time has passed since the commencement of the matter), with few or no substantive legal decisions by the court defining the scope of the claims, the class (if any), or the potentially available damages, and fact discovery is still in progress or has not yet begun. For all these reasons, the Company cannot at this time estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss, if any, for these matters. It is the opinion of the Company’s management, based on current knowledge and after taking into account its current legal accruals, the eventual outcome of all matters described in this Note would not be likely to have a material impact on the consolidated financial condition of the Company. Nonetheless, given the substantial or indeterminate amounts sought in certain of these matters, and the inherent unpredictability of such matters, an adverse outcome in certain of these matters could, from time to time, have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.

Note 7. Commitments and Contingencies

We are involved in ongoing legal and regulatory proceedings. Other than those described in the following paragraphs, there were no material changes to our disclosures of commitments and contingencies from our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February 2, 2013 and our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 4, 2013.

Consumer Class Action Claims

Massachusetts Zip Code Claims

Relying in part on the California Supreme Court decision, an additional purported class action lawsuit was filed on May 20, 2011 against the Company: Melissa Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc. in the U.S. District Court-District of Massachusetts, alleging violation of a Massachusetts statute regarding the collection of personally identification information in connection with a credit card transaction. On March 11, 2013, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled on certified questions on the interpretation of the statute and remanded the case to the U.S. District Court for further proceedings. Following the Judicial Court’s decision, an additional purported class action lawsuit asserting the same allegations in Tyler was filed in the U.S. District Court-District of Massachusetts by Susan D’Esposito, and the two cases have been consolidated. On August 12, 2013, a tentative settlement that is subject to Court approval was reached for an amount that will not have a material effect on our Consolidated Financial Statements.

Governmental inquiries and related matters

Non-U.S. trust inquiry

In early 2005, the District Attorney’s office of the County of New York and the SEC opened inquiries concerning non-U.S. trusts that directly or indirectly held shares of Michaels common stock and common stock options. On July 29, 2010, the SEC filed a civil enforcement action in federal district court for the Southern District of New York against Charles Wyly, Sam Wyly, the Wylys’ attorney—Michael French, and others alleging, among other things, violations of various federal securities laws, including those governing ownership reporting and trading of securities, in connection with the non-U.S. trusts and their subsidiaries. Additional information may be obtained at the SEC’s website. Sam Wyly, the estate of Charles Wyly and Mr. French, also a former director of the Company, have requested indemnification from the Company for certain legal costs with respect to these matters. The Company has resolved all claims with regards to Sam Wyly and the estate of Charles Wyly for an immaterial amount.

On April 12, 2012, Mr. French filed a lawsuit against the Company and the non-U.S. trusts in the District Court of Dallas County, Texas. The matter was dismissed as to the non-U.S. trusts. Mr. French seeks damages from the Company for breach of contract, attorneys’ fees and costs related to the Company’s alleged indemnification obligations to Mr. French and attorneys’ fees and costs related to the lawsuit. On August 9, 2013, the dispute was settled for an amount that will not have a material effect on our Consolidated Financial Statements.

General

In addition to the litigation discussed above, we are, and in the future, may be involved in various other lawsuits, claims and proceedings incident to the ordinary course of business. 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.

ASC 450, Contingencies, governs the disclosure and recognition of loss contingencies, including potential losses from litigation and regulatory matters. It imposes different requirements for the recognition and disclosure of loss contingencies based on the likelihood of occurrence of the contingent future event or events. It distinguishes among degrees of likelihood using the following three terms: “probable”, meaning that “the future event or events are likely to occur”; “remote”, meaning that “the chance of the future event or events occurring is slight”; and “reasonably possible”, meaning that “the chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less than likely”. In accordance with ASC 450, the Company accrues for a loss contingency when we conclude that the likelihood of a loss is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. When the loss cannot be reasonably estimated we estimate the range of amounts, and if no amount in the range constitutes a better estimate than any other amount, we accrue for the amount at the low end of the range. We adjust our accruals from time to time as we receive additional information, but the loss we incur may be significantly greater than or less than the amount we have accrued. We disclose loss contingencies if there is at least a reasonable possibility that a material loss has been incurred. No accrual or disclosure is required for losses that are remote.

For some of the matters disclosed above, as well as other matters previously disclosed in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Company is currently able to estimate a reasonably possible loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued (if any). For some of the matters included within this estimation, an accrual has been made because a loss is believed to be both probable and reasonably estimable, but an exposure to loss exists in excess of the amount accrued; in these cases, the estimate reflects the reasonably possible range of loss in excess of the accrued amount. For other matters included within this estimation, no accrual has been made because a loss, although estimable, is believed to be reasonably possible, but not probable; in these cases the estimate reflects the reasonably possible loss or range of loss within the ranges identified. For the various ranges identified, the aggregate of these estimated amounts is approximately $10 million, which is also inclusive of amounts accrued by the Company.

For other matters disclosed above or as previously disclosed in the Company’s filings with the SEC, the Company is not currently able to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss, and has indicated such. Many of these matters remain in preliminary stages (even in some cases where a substantial period of time has passed since the commencement of the matter), with few or no substantive legal decisions by the court defining the scope of the claims, the class (if any), or the potentially available damages, and fact discovery is still in progress or has not yet begun. For all these reasons, the Company cannot at this time estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss, if any, for these matters.

It is the opinion of the Company’s management, based on current knowledge and after taking into account its current legal accruals, the eventual outcome of all matters described in this Note would not be likely to have a material impact on the consolidated financial condition of the Company. Nonetheless, given the substantial or indeterminate amounts sought in certain of these matters, and the inherent unpredictability of such matters, an adverse outcome in certain of these matters could, from time to time, have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.