XML 38 R15.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.2.0.727
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2015
Commitments and contingenciestextblock  
Commitments Contingencies

NOTE 8. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

 

Litigation. The Company and its subsidiaries, from time to time, have been involved in various items of litigation incidental to and in the ordinary course of its business and, in the opinion of management, the outcome of such litigation will not have a material adverse impact upon the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

 

ART and ART Midwest, Inc.

 

In August 2014, David M. Clapper and two entities related to Mr. Clapper (all, collectively, the “Clapper Parties”) filed a complaint in the U. S. District Court against the Company, its directors and certain of its officers alleging purported transactions to the detriment of the Clapper Parties and others by transferring assets, cash and diverting property. Management of the Company believes that there is no basis for this action against the Company and its officers and directors and intends to vigorously defend itself. The August 2014 complaint does not allege any facts relating to the Company, except that the named directors and officers are directors and officers of the Company and that the Company is a Nevada corporation, with its headquarters/principal place of business in Dallas, Texas.

 

The case arises over other litigation, commenced in 1999, among the Clapper Parties and American Realty Trust, Inc. (“ART”) and its former subsidiary, ART Midwest, Inc., originally arising out of a transaction in 1998, in which ART and the Clapper Parties were to form a partnership to own eight residential apartment complexes. Over the ensuing years, a number of rulings, both for and against ART and ART Midwest, Inc., were issued, resulting in a ruling in October 2011, under which the Clapper Parties were awarded an initial judgment for approximately $74 million, including $26 million in actual damages and $48 million in interest. The 2011 ruling was only against ART and ART Midwest, Inc., but no other entity. During February 2014, the Court of Appeals affirmed a portion of the judgment in favor of the Clapper Parties but also ruled that a double counting of a significant portion of the damages had occurred and remanded the case back to the trial court to recalculate the damage award, as well as pre- and post-judgment interest thereon. ART was also a significant owner of a partnership interest in the partnership that was awarded the initial damages in the matter.

 

ART and ART Midwest, Inc. are not and have never been subsidiaries of the Company. Management believes that the Company has no liability for any ultimate judgment in the proceeding involving the Clapper Parties.