XML 28 R19.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.8.0.1
Subsequent Events
3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Subsequent Events [Abstract]  
Subsequent Events
Subsequent Events
Following the Company's press release on January 30, 2017, three putative class actions were filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin on behalf of a class of persons who acquired common stock of the Company between May 8, 2014 and January 30, 2017, inclusive. The Complaints allege that the Company, Mark A. DiBlasi, and Peter R. Armbruster violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Messrs. DiBlasi and Armbruster violated Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, by making materially false or misleading statements, or failing to disclose material facts, regarding the Company's internal control over financial reporting and financial statements. The Complaints seek certification as a class action, compensatory damages, and attorney’s fees and costs. On May 19, 2017, the Court consolidated the actions under the caption In re Roadrunner Transportation Systems, Inc. Securities Litigation, and appointed Public Employees’ Retirement System as lead plaintiff. Counsel for lead plaintiff has advised the Company of their intent to file a consolidated Amended Complaint after the Company issues its restated financial statements.
On May 25, 2017, Richard Flanagan filed a complaint alleging derivative claims on the Company's behalf in the Circuit Court of Milwaukee County, State of Wisconsin (Case No. 17-cv-004401) against Scott Rued, Mark DiBlasi, Christopher Doerr, John Kennedy, III, Brian Murray, James Staley, Curtis Stoelting, William Urkiel, Judith Vijums, Michael Ward, Chad Utrup, Ivor Evans, Peter Armbruster, and Brian van Helden. Count I of the Complaint alleges the Director Defendants breached their fiduciary duties by “knowingly failing to ensure that the Company implemented and maintained adequate internal controls over its accounting and financial reporting functions,” and seeks unspecified damages. Count II of the Complaint alleges the Officer Defendants DiBlasi, Armbruster, and van Helden received substantial performance-based compensation and bonuses for fiscal year 2014 that should be disgorged. The action has been stayed by agreement pending a decision on an anticipated motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint to be filed in the securities class action described above.
On June 28, 2017, Jesse Kent filed a complaint alleging derivative claims on the Company's behalf and class action claims in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (Case No. 17-cv-00893-PP) against Scott Rued, Mark DiBlasi, Christopher Doerr, John Kennedy, III, Brian Murray, James Staley, Curtis Stoelting, William Urkiel, Judith Vijums, Michael Ward, Chad Utrup, Ivor Evans, Peter Armbruster, Brian van Helden, Scott Dobak, and Ralph Kittle. Count I of the complaint alleges the Individual Defendants other than Armbruster, Dobak, Evans, Kittle, and van Helden, violated Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act by making false and misleading statements in proxies concerning the Company's financial statements and internal controls. Count II of the Complaint alleges: (i) all the Individual Defendants breached their fiduciary duties of good faith, candor, and loyalty by creating a culture of lawlessness; (ii) the Officer Defendants knew, were reckless, or were grossly negligent in not knowing that the Company lacked effective internal controls and the financial statements were inaccurate; (iii) the Director Defendants other than Dobak and Kittle breached their duty of loyalty by recklessly permitting the improper statements concerning the Company's internal controls and financial statements; (iv) the Director Defendants other than Dobak and Kittle breached their fiduciary duty and committed the ultra vires act of appointing the interlocking director defendant Dobak to the Company's Board of Directors in violation of Section 8 of the Clayton Act; and (v) the Audit Committee Defendants breached their fiduciary duty of loyalty by approving the statements concerning the Company's internal controls and financial statements. Count III of the Complaint alleges all the Individual Defendants wasted corporate assets by: (i) spending hundreds of millions of dollars to purchase various companies in connection with its alleged reckless growth-through-acquisition strategy; (ii) forcing the Company to have to defend itself in the securities fraud lawsuits; and (iii) paying improper compensation and bonuses to certain of the executive officers and directors who breached their fiduciary duty. Count IV of the Complaint alleges all the Individual Defendants were unjustly enriched as a result of the compensation and director remuneration they received while breaching their fiduciary duties. Count V of the Complaint alleges a direct claim against the current directors based on the Company's failure to hold an annual meeting of stockholders by June 18, 2017 (13 months after its previous annual meeting of stockholders). The Complaint seeks judgment awarding unspecified damages, directing the Company to make certain corporate governance changes, awarding restitution, ordering disgorgement, directing the Company to hold its annual meeting of stockholders, and directing the Board of Directors to remove Dobak from the Board. On September 29, 2017, all the Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. The motion is being held in abeyance pending the Company filing its restated consolidated financial statements.
On December 22, 2017, Chester County Employees Retirement Fund filed a Complaint alleging derivative claims on the Company's behalf in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (Case No. 2:17-cv-01788-NJ) against the same defendants as those named in the Kent action. The allegations are substantially the same as those in the Kent Complaint.
In addition, subsequent to the announcement that certain previously filed financial statements should not be relied upon, the Company was contacted by the SEC, FINRA, and the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice and Division of Enforcement of the SEC have commenced investigations into the events giving rise to the restatement. The Company has received formal requests for documents and other information. The Company is cooperating fully with all of these agencies.
The Company is unable to estimate the costs associated with the above matters at this time.