Commitments and Contingencies

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2012

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

10) COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

The Company has indemnification obligations with respect to letters of credit and surety bonds primarily used as security against non-performance in the normal course of business. At September 30, 2012, the outstanding letters of credit and surety bonds approximated $439 million and were not recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.

In the course of its business, the Company both provides and receives indemnities which are intended to allocate certain risks associated with business transactions. Similarly, the Company may remain contingently liable for various obligations of a business that has been divested in the event that a third party does not live up to its obligations under an indemnification obligation. The Company records a liability for its indemnification obligations and other contingent liabilities when probable under GAAP.

Legal Matters

E-books Matters.    A number of lawsuits described below are pending against the following parties relating to the sale of e-books: Apple Inc., Hachette Book Group, Inc., HarperCollins Publishers, LLC, Holtzbrinck Publishers LLC d/b/a Macmillan, Penguin Group (USA) Inc. and the Company's subsidiary, Simon & Schuster, Inc. (collectively, the "Publishing parties").

On April 10, 2012, for purposes of settlement and without any admission of wrongdoing or liability, Simon & Schuster and two of the other Publishing parties entered into a settlement stipulation and proposed final judgment (the "Stipulation") with the United States Department of Justice (the "DOJ") in connection with the DOJ's investigations of agency distribution of e-books. In furtherance of this settlement, on April 11, 2012, the DOJ filed an antitrust action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Publishing parties and concurrently filed the Stipulation with the court. On September 7, 2012, the Stipulation was approved by the court and final judgment was entered. The Stipulation does not involve any monetary payments by Simon & Schuster, but will require the adoption of certain business practices for a 24 month period and certain compliance practices for a five year period.

On June 11, 2012, for purposes of settlement and without any admission of wrongdoing or liability, Simon & Schuster entered into a proposed settlement agreement to resolve the antitrust action filed by a number of states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico against several of the Publishing parties in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, which was transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York ("States") on April 30, 2012. The proposed settlement provides that, certain Publishing parties, including Simon & Schuster, will pay agreed upon amounts for consumer restitution, among other things, and also requires the adoption of certain business and compliance practices, which are substantially similar to those described in the Stipulation with the DOJ. The proposed settlement is subject to court approval. On September 14, 2012, the court granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement, which all states (except Minnesota), the District Columbia and the United States territories joined. On October 15, 2012, Simon & Schuster paid the agreed upon amounts into an escrow account pending final court approval. The court is scheduled to conduct a final settlement approval hearing on February 8, 2013. The Company believes that this settlement with the States and the Stipulation with the DOJ will not have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

On December 9, 2011, the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (the "MDL") issued an order consolidating in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York various purported class action suits that private litigants had filed in federal courts in California and New York. On January 20, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended class action complaint with the court against the Publishing parties. These private litigant plaintiffs, who are e-book purchasers, allege that, among other things, the defendants are in violation of federal and/or state antitrust laws in connection with the sale of e-books pursuant to agency distribution arrangements between each of the publishers and e-book retailers. The consolidated amended class action complaint generally seeks multiple forms of damages for the purchase of e-books and injunctive and other relief. On March 2, 2012, the Publishing parties filed a motion to dismiss this action. On May 15, 2012, the court denied the motion to dismiss. The Company believes that the States' settlement, if approved by the court, would likely resolve the class claims of those private litigant plaintiffs in the MDL litigation who reside in the areas covered by the States' settlement and who do not opt-out of such settlement.

Commencing on February 24, 2012, similar antitrust suits have been filed under Canadian law against the Publishing parties by private litigants in Canada, purportedly as class actions. Simon & Schuster intends to vigorously defend itself in the MDL and Canadian matters.

In addition, the European Commission (the “EC”) and Canadian Competition Bureau are conducting separate competition investigations of agency distribution arrangements of e-books in this industry and Simon & Schuster is cooperating with these investigations. On September 19, 2012, the EC began accepting public comment on the terms of a proposed settlement. The proposed settlement between the EC and certain Publishing parties, including Simon & Schuster, requires the adoption of certain business and compliance practices similar to those described in the Stipulation with the DOJ, subject to public comment.

Claims Related to Former Businesses: Asbestos.    The Company is a defendant in lawsuits claiming various personal injuries related to asbestos and other materials, which allegedly occurred principally as a result of exposure caused by various products manufactured by Westinghouse, a predecessor, generally prior to the early 1970s. Westinghouse was neither a producer nor a manufacturer of asbestos. The Company is typically named as one of a large number of defendants in both state and federal cases. In the majority of asbestos lawsuits, the plaintiffs have not identified which of the Company's products is the basis of a claim. Claims against the Company in which a product has been identified principally relate to exposures allegedly caused by asbestos-containing insulating material in turbines sold for power-generation, industrial and marine use, or by asbestos-containing grades of decorative micarta, a laminate used in commercial ships.

Claims are frequently filed and/or settled in groups, which may make the amount and timing of settlements, and the number of pending claims, subject to significant fluctuation from period to period. The Company does not report as pending those claims on inactive, stayed, deferred or similar dockets which some jurisdictions have established for claimants who allege minimal or no impairment. As of September 30, 2012, the Company had pending approximately 46,060 asbestos claims, as compared with approximately 50,090 as of December 31, 2011 and 50,120 as of September 30, 2011. During the third quarter of 2012, the Company received approximately 1,100 new claims and closed or moved to an inactive docket approximately 1,060 claims. The Company reports claims as closed when it becomes aware that a dismissal order has been entered by a court or when the Company has reached agreement with the claimants on the material terms of a settlement. Settlement costs depend on the seriousness of the injuries that form the basis of the claim, the quality of evidence supporting the claims and other factors. The Company's total costs for the years 2011 and 2010 for settlement and defense of asbestos claims after insurance recoveries and net of tax benefits were approximately $33 million and $14 million, respectively. The Company's costs for settlement and defense of asbestos claims may vary year to year as insurance proceeds are not always recovered in the same period as the insured portion of the expenses.

The Company believes that its reserves and insurance are adequate to cover its asbestos liabilities. This belief is based upon many factors and assumptions, including the number of outstanding claims, estimated average cost per claim, the breakdown of claims by disease type, historic claim filings, costs per claim of resolution and the filing of new claims. While the number of asbestos claims filed against the Company has trended down in recent years, it is difficult to predict future asbestos liabilities, as events and circumstances may occur including, among others, the number and types of claims and average cost to resolve such claims, which could affect the Company's estimate of its asbestos liabilities.

Other.    The Company from time to time receives claims from federal and state environmental regulatory agencies and other entities asserting that it is or may be liable for environmental cleanup costs and related damages principally relating to historical and predecessor operations of the Company. In addition, the Company from time to time receives personal injury claims including toxic tort and product liability claims (other than asbestos) arising from historical operations of the Company and its predecessors.

General.    On an ongoing basis, the Company vigorously defends itself in numerous lawsuits and proceedings and responds to various investigations and inquiries from federal, state and local authorities (collectively, "litigation"). Litigation may be brought against the Company without merit, is inherently uncertain and always difficult to predict. However, based on its understanding and evaluation of the relevant facts and circumstances, the Company believes that the above-described legal matters and other litigation to which it is a party are not likely, in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Under the Separation Agreement between the Company and Viacom Inc., the Company and Viacom Inc. have agreed to defend and indemnify the other in certain litigation in which the Company and/or Viacom Inc. is named.