XML 22 R11.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.8.0.1
Note 6 - Commitments and Contingencies
3 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Notes to Financial Statements  
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]
Note
6.
Commitments and Contingencies
 
(a) Leases
 
Related Party L
e
ases.
Warehouse and office facilities are leased from Vitamin Realty, which is
100%
owned by the Company’s chairman, Chief Executive Officer and major stockholder and certain of his family members, who are also executive officers and directors of the Company. On
January 5, 2012,
MDC entered into a
second
amendment of lease (the “Second Lease Amendment”) with Vitamin Realty for its office and warehouse space in New Jersey increasing its rentable square footage from an aggregate of
74,898
square feet to
76,161
square feet and extending the expiration date to
January 31, 2026.
This Second Lease Amendment provides for minimum annual rental payments of
$533,
plus increases in real estate taxes and building operating expenses. On
May 19, 2014,
AgroLabs entered into an Amendment to the lease agreement entered into on
January 5, 2012,
with Vitamin Realty for an additional
2,700
square feet of warehouse space in New Jersey, the term of which was to expire on
January 31, 2019
to extend the expiration date to
January 1, 2024.
This additional lease provides for minimum lease payments of
$27
with annual increases plus the proportionate share of operating expenses.
 
Rent expense for the
three
months ended
September 30, 2017
and
2016
on these leases were
$201
and
$197
respectively, and are included in both cost of sales and selling and administrative expenses in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. As of
September 30, 2017
and
June 30, 2017,
the Company had an outstanding obligation to Vitamin Realty of
$786
and
$763,
respectively, included in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities and long term debt in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.
 
Other Lease Commitments.
The Company has entered into certain non-cancelable operating lease agreements expiring up through
January 31, 2026,
related to office and warehouse space, equipment and vehicles (inclusive of the related party lease with Vitamin Realty).
 
The minimum rental commitment
s for long-term non-cancelable leases are as follows:
 
   
Operating
   
Related Party
         
Year ending
 
Lease
   
Lease
         
June 30,
 
Commitment
   
Commitment
   
Total
 
                         
2018, remaining
  $
34
    $
422
    $
456
 
2019
   
27
     
563
     
590
 
2020
   
22
     
563
     
585
 
2021
   
21
     
563
     
584
 
2022
   
8
     
563
     
571
 
2023
   
-
     
563
     
563
 
Thereafter
   
-
     
1,392
     
1,392
 
Total
  $
112
    $
4,629
    $
4,741
 
 
 
Total rent expense, including real estate taxes and maintenance charges, was approximately
$242
and
$237
for the
three
months ended
September 30, 2017
and
2016,
respectively. Rent expense is included in cost of sales and selling and administrative expenses in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.
 
(
b
) Legal Proceedings.
 
The Company is subject, from time to time, to claims by
third
parties under various legal theories. The defense of such claims, or any adverse outcome relating to any such claims, could have a material adverse effect on the Company
’s liquidity, financial condition and cash flows.
 
(c) Other Claims.
 
 
On
May 15, 2012,
Cedarburg Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("Cedarburg") sent the Company a letter (the "Demand Letter") setting forth a demand for indemnification under the Stock Purchase Agreement, dated
March 17, 2009 (
the "Cedarburg SPA"), by and among Cedarburg, InB: Hauser Pharmaceutical Services, Inc., InB: Paxis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and the Company. In the Demand Letter, Cedarburg demanded payment by the Company of
$0.6
million in respect of the Company's indemnification obligations under the Cedarburg SPA. In addition, in the Demand Letter, Cedarburg informed the Company that there are also environmental issues pending which
may
lead to additional costs to Cedarburg which will likely be in excess of $
0.3
million.
 
On
May 30, 2012,
the Company sent a letter responding to the Demand Letter and setting forth the Company
’s position that it has
no
obligation to indemnify Cedarburg as demanded. On
June 18, 2012,
Cedarburg responded to the Company’s letter and, on
July 27, 2012,
the Company sent another letter to Cedarburg reiterating its position that the Company has
no
obligation to indemnify Cedarburg as demanded. On
December 18, 2012,
Cedarburg responded to the Company’s letter and, on
January 15, 2013,
the Company sent another letter to Cedarburg reiterating its position that the Company has
no
obligation to indemnify Cedarburg as demanded. As of
November 9, 2017,
the Company has
not
received any further communication from Cedarburg with respect to its demand for indemnification as set forth in the Demand Letter. The Company intends to vigorously contest Cedarburg's demand as set forth in the Demand Letter.