Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2020

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments and Contingencies

Environmental

The Company’s policy with regard to environmental liabilities is to accrue for future environmental assessments and remediation costs when information becomes available that indicates that it is probable that the Company is liable for any related claims and assessments and the amount of the liability is reasonably estimable. The Company does not believe that any such matters will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, cash flows or results of operations.

Litigation and Potential Claims

From time to time, the Company is involved in various legal proceedings and other matters arising in the normal course of business. Corrosion, hydrogen embrittlement, cracking, material hardness, wood pressure-treating chemicals, misinstallations, misuse, design and assembly flaws, manufacturing defects, labeling defects, product formula defects, inaccurate chemical mixes, adulteration, environmental conditions, or other factors can contribute to failure of fasteners, connectors, anchors, adhesives, specialty chemicals, such as fiber reinforced polymers, and tool products. In addition, inaccuracies may occur in product information, descriptions and instructions found in catalogs, packaging, data sheets, and the Company’s website.

The resolution of any claim or litigation is subject to inherent uncertainty and could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, cash flows or results of operations.

Gentry Homes, Ltd. v. Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc., et al., Case No. 17-cv-00566, was filed in a federal district court in Hawaii against Simpson Strong-Tie Company Inc. and the Company on November 20, 2017. The Gentry case is a product of a previous state court class action, Nishimura v. Gentry Homes, Ltd., et al., Civil No. 11-1-1522-07, which is now closed. The Nishimura case concerned alleged corrosion of the Company’s galvanized “hurricane straps” and mudsill anchor products used in a residential project in Ewa by Gentry, Honolulu, Hawaii. In the Nishimura case, the plaintiff homeowners and the developer, Gentry Homes, Ltd. (“Gentry”), arbitrated their dispute and agreed on a settlement in the amount of approximately $90 million. In the subsequent Gentry case, Gentry alleges breach of warranty and negligent misrepresentation by the Company related to its “hurricane strap” and mudsill anchor products, and demands general, special, and consequential damages from the Company in an amount to be proven at trial. Gentry also seeks pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, attorneys’ fees and costs, and other relief. The Company admits no liability and will vigorously defend the claims brought against it. At this time, the Company cannot reasonably ascertain the likelihood that it will be found responsible for substantial damages to Gentry. Based on the facts currently known, and subject to future events and circumstances, the Company believes that all or part of the claims brought against it in the Gentry case may be covered by its insurance policies.

Given the nature and the complexities involved in the Gentry proceeding, the Company is unable to estimate reasonably the likelihood of possible loss or a range of possible loss until the Company knows, among other factors, (i) the specific claims brought against the Company and the legal theories on which they are based; (ii) what claims, if any, might be dismissed without trial; (iii) how the discovery process will affect the litigation; (iv) the settlement posture of the other parties to the litigation; (v) the damages to be proven at trial, particularly if the damages are not specified or are indeterminate; (vi) the extent to which the Company’s insurance policies will cover the claims or any part thereof, if at all; and (vii) any other factors that may have a material effect on the proceeding.