Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 9 – Commitments and Contingencies Insurance The Company maintains general liability insurance and all-risk property and rental value, with sub-limits for certain perils such as floods and earthquakes on each of the Company’s properties. The Company also maintains coverage for terrorism acts as defined by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, which expires in December 2027. Insurance premiums are charged directly to each of the properties. The Company will be responsible for deductibles and losses in excess of insurance coverage, which could be material. The Company continues to monitor the state of the insurance market and the scope and costs of coverage for acts of terrorism. However, the Company cannot anticipate what coverage will be available on commercially reasonable terms in the future. Environmental Matters Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, the Company may be considered an owner or operator of real property or may have arranged for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances. As a result, the Company may be liable for certain costs including removal, remediation, government fines and injuries to persons and property. Under the Original Master Lease and the Holdco Master Lease, Holdco is required to indemnify the Company from certain environmental liabilities at the Consolidated Properties before or during the period in which each Consolidated Property was leased to Holdco, including removal and remediation of all affected facilities and equipment constituting the automotive care center. In addition, an environmental reserve was funded at the closing of the transactions in connection with the Company commencing operations in the amount of approximately $12.0 million. As of June 30, 2022 and December 31, 2021, the balance of the environmental reserve was approximately $9.5 million, respectively, and is included in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities in the condensed consolidated balance sheets. Litigation and Other Matters In accordance with accounting standards regarding loss contingencies, the Company accrues an undiscounted liability for those contingencies where the incurrence of a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated, and the Company discloses the amount accrued and the amount of a reasonably possible loss in excess of the amount accrued or discloses the fact that such a range of loss cannot be estimated. The Company does not record liabilities when the likelihood that the liability has been incurred is probable but the amount cannot be reasonably estimated, or when the liability is believed to be only reasonably possible or remote. On April 18, 2019, at the direction of the Restructuring Sub-Committee of the Restructuring Committee of the Board of Directors of Sears Holdings, plaintiffs Sears Holdings, Sears, Roebuck & Co., Sears Development Co., Kmart Corporation, and Kmart of Washington, LLC filed a lawsuit (the “Litigation”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Bankruptcy Court”) against, among others, Edward S. Lampert, ESL Investments, Inc. and certain of its affiliates and investors, Fairholme Capital Management, L.L.C., certain members of the Sears Holdings board of directors, and the Company, the Operating Partnership, and certain of our affiliates and subsidiaries (the Company, the Operating Partnership, and certain of our affiliates and subsidiaries collectively, the “Seritage Defendants”). The Litigation is dual captioned as In re: Sears Holdings Corporation, et al., Case No. 18-23538 (RDD) and Sears Holdings Corporation et al., v. Lampert et al., Case No. 19-08250 (RDD). The initial complaint has been superseded by the Amended Complaint, as described below. On October 15, 2019, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order (the “Confirmation Order”) confirming the Modified Second Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Sears Holdings and its affiliated debtors (the “Chapter 11 Plan”). Pursuant to the terms of the Confirmation Order, upon the effective date of the Chapter 11 Plan, a liquidating trust will be formed, and the Litigation will vest in the liquidating trust. The Confirmation Order further provides that, prior to the effective date of the Chapter 11 Plan and the formation of the liquidating trust, the Litigation shall be controlled by five litigation designees selected by Sears Holdings and the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors’ (the “Creditors' Committee”). For further information, refer to the Chapter 11 Plan, Confirmation Order and liquidating trust agreement, each of which has been publicly filed with the Bankruptcy Court. On November 25, 2019, the Creditors’ Committee filed a first amended complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) in the Bankruptcy Court. The Amended Complaint alleges, among other things, that certain transactions undertaken by Sears Holdings since 2011 (including the July 2015 transactions giving rise to Seritage, the execution of the Master Lease with Sears Holdings (the “Original Master Lease”), and the acquisition of real estate from Sears Holdings) constituted actual and/or constructive fraudulent transfers and/or illegal dividends by Sears Holdings and that the real estate acquired by Seritage from Sears Holdings in July 2015 was worth hundreds of millions of dollars more than the purchase price paid. (The Company notes the original complaint filed in the Litigation alleged, among other things, that the real estate acquired by Seritage from Sears Holdings in July 2015 was worth at least $649 million to $749 million more than the purchase price paid.) The Amended Complaint further alleges that certain releases provided to Seritage and certain other defendants in connection with the Sears Holdings derivative litigation in the Delaware Court of Chancery in 2017 should be avoided and/or declared null and void as an actual and/or constructive fraudulent conveyance. The Litigation seeks as relief, among other things, declaratory relief, avoidance of the allegedly actual and/or constructive fraudulent transfers and either (i) rescission of the transfers of real estate from Sears Holdings to Seritage in 2015 and return of the proceeds of the transactions between Sears Holdings and Seritage, or, in the alternative, (ii) payment by Seritage to Sears Holdings of damages at least equal to the value of the transferred property. On February 21, 2020, the Seritage Defendants filed a partial motion to dismiss seeking dismissal of the claims in the Amended Complaint relating to the release received in the Sears Holdings derivative litigation, unjust enrichment and equitable subordination. Briefing and oral argument on the motions were completed in August 2020, and the parties are awaiting a decision. On March 15, 2021, the Court consolidated the Litigation with a case captioned Sears Holding Corp. et al. v. Andrew H. Tisch, et al., Case No. 20-07007 (RDD) (the “Shareholder Litigation,” and, together with the Litigation, the “Consolidated Litigation”). The Shareholder Litigation was brought by the UCC (as defined below), Sears Holdings Corporation, and Sears, Roebuck and Co., against certain shareholders of Sears Holdings or its related companies. Seritage was not named as a defendant in the Shareholder Litigation, which alleges, among other things, that certain transactions undertaken by Sears Holdings since 2014 (including the July 2015 transactions giving rise to Seritage, the execution of the Original Master Lease with Sears Holdings, and the acquisition of real estate from Sears Holdings) constituted actual and/or constructive fraudulent transfers and/or illegal dividends. On April 6, 2022, the Court entered an order in the Consolidated Litigation, upon the agreement of the parties thereto, providing for a mediation of the litigation. The parties and the Court extended the mediation several times, through August, and up until the settlement described below was reached. On August 9, 2022, following the mediation, all of the parties to the Litigation and certain of the parties to the Shareholder Litigation (to which Seritage is not a defendant) entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which, pending final Court approval, the defendants will pay to the Sears estate $175 million (of which the Seritage Defendants will contribute approximately $35 million) in exchange for dismissal of the Consolidated Litigation and for the full and final satisfaction and release of all claims in the Consolidated Litigation (including, in the case of the Seritage Defendants, any and all claims between the Seritage Defendants and the Sears estate in the Sears bankruptcy proceeding). The settlement is subject to final Court approval, following notice and an opportunity for objections (if any) at a hearing currently scheduled for August 31, 2022. As previously disclosed, the Company remains in active litigation with its D&O insurers concerning potential coverage for the Litigation, and any amounts received from the insurers will offset the Seritage Defendants’ approximately $35 million contribution. While the Company believes that the claims against the Seritage Defendants in the Litigation are without merit, the Company has entered into the settlement, without admitting any fault or wrongdoing, in order to avoid the continued imposition of legal defense costs, distraction, and the uncertainty and risk inherent in any litigation. If the settlement does not receive final Court approval, the Company intends to defend against the claims in the Litigation vigorously. The Company has reserved $35 million based on the Company’s contributions to the proposed settlement, subject to final Court approval, of the Litigation. This estimate is recorded as litigation reserve in the condensed consolidated statement of operations during the three and six months ended June 30, 2022. On March 2, 2021, the Company brought a lawsuit in Delaware state court against QBE Insurance Corporation, Endurance American Insurance Company, Allianz Global Risks US Insurance Company and Continental Casualty Company, each of which are D&O insurance providers of the Company (the “D&O Insurers”). The Company’s lawsuit is seeking, among other things, declaratory relief and money damages as a result of certain of the D&O Insurers refusal to pay certain costs and expenses related to the defense of the Litigation discussed above. In addition to the litigation described above, the Company is subject, from time to time, to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business and due to the current environment. While the resolution of such matters cannot be predicted with certainty, management believes, based on currently available information, that the final outcome of such matters will not have a material effect on the condensed consolidated financial position, results of operations, cash flows or liquidity of the Company. As of June 30, 2022, and December 31, 2021, the Company did not record any amounts for litigation or other matters.

Commitments and Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2022

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Note 9 – Commitments and Contingencies

Insurance

The Company maintains general liability insurance and all-risk property and rental value, with sub-limits for certain perils such as floods and earthquakes on each of the Company’s properties. The Company also maintains coverage for terrorism acts as defined by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, which expires in December 2027.

Insurance premiums are charged directly to each of the properties. The Company will be responsible for deductibles and losses in excess of insurance coverage, which could be material. The Company continues to monitor the state of the insurance market and the scope and costs of coverage for acts of terrorism. However, the Company cannot anticipate what coverage will be available on commercially reasonable terms in the future.

Environmental Matters

Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, the Company may be considered an owner or operator of real property or may have arranged for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances. As a result, the Company may be liable for certain costs including removal, remediation, government fines and injuries to persons and property.

Under the Original Master Lease and the Holdco Master Lease, Holdco is required to indemnify the Company from certain environmental liabilities at the Consolidated Properties before or during the period in which each Consolidated Property was leased to Holdco, including removal and remediation of all affected facilities and equipment constituting the automotive care center. In addition, an environmental reserve was funded at the closing of the transactions in connection with the Company commencing operations in the amount of approximately $12.0 million. As of June 30, 2022 and December 31, 2021, the balance of the environmental reserve was approximately $9.5 million, respectively, and is included in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities in the condensed consolidated balance sheets.

Litigation and Other Matters

In accordance with accounting standards regarding loss contingencies, the Company accrues an undiscounted liability for those contingencies where the incurrence of a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated, and the Company discloses the amount accrued and the amount of a reasonably possible loss in excess of the amount accrued or discloses the fact that such a range of loss cannot be estimated. The Company does not record liabilities when the likelihood that the liability has been incurred is probable but the amount cannot be reasonably estimated, or when the liability is believed to be only reasonably possible or remote.

On April 18, 2019, at the direction of the Restructuring Sub-Committee of the Restructuring Committee of the Board of Directors of Sears Holdings, plaintiffs Sears Holdings, Sears, Roebuck & Co., Sears Development Co., Kmart Corporation, and Kmart of Washington, LLC filed a lawsuit (the “Litigation”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Bankruptcy Court”) against, among others, Edward S. Lampert, ESL Investments, Inc. and certain of its affiliates and investors, Fairholme Capital Management, L.L.C., certain members of the Sears Holdings board of directors, and the Company, the Operating Partnership, and certain of our affiliates and subsidiaries (the Company, the Operating Partnership, and certain of our affiliates and subsidiaries collectively, the “Seritage Defendants”). The Litigation is dual captioned as In re: Sears Holdings Corporation, et al., Case No. 18-23538 (RDD) and Sears Holdings Corporation et al., v. Lampert et al., Case No. 19-08250 (RDD). The initial complaint has been superseded by the Amended Complaint, as described below.

On October 15, 2019, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order (the “Confirmation Order”) confirming the Modified Second Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Sears Holdings and its affiliated debtors (the “Chapter 11 Plan”). Pursuant to the terms of the Confirmation Order, upon the effective date of the Chapter 11 Plan, a liquidating trust will be formed, and the Litigation will vest in the liquidating trust. The Confirmation Order further provides that, prior to the effective date of the Chapter 11 Plan and the formation of the liquidating trust, the Litigation shall be controlled by five litigation designees selected by Sears Holdings and the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors’ (the “Creditors' Committee”). For further information, refer to the Chapter 11 Plan, Confirmation Order and liquidating trust agreement, each of which has been publicly filed with the Bankruptcy Court.

On November 25, 2019, the Creditors’ Committee filed a first amended complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) in the Bankruptcy Court. The Amended Complaint alleges, among other things, that certain transactions undertaken by Sears Holdings since 2011 (including the July 2015 transactions giving rise to Seritage, the execution of the Master Lease with Sears Holdings (the “Original Master Lease”), and the acquisition of real estate from Sears Holdings) constituted actual and/or constructive fraudulent transfers and/or illegal dividends by Sears Holdings and that the real estate acquired by Seritage from Sears Holdings in July 2015 was worth hundreds of millions of dollars more than the purchase price paid. (The Company notes the original complaint filed in the Litigation alleged, among other things, that the real estate acquired by Seritage from Sears Holdings in July 2015 was worth at least $649 million to $749 million more than the purchase price paid.) The Amended Complaint further alleges that certain releases provided to Seritage and certain other defendants in connection with the Sears Holdings derivative litigation in the Delaware Court of Chancery in 2017 should be avoided and/or declared null and void as an actual and/or constructive fraudulent conveyance. The Litigation seeks as relief, among other things, declaratory relief, avoidance of the allegedly actual and/or constructive fraudulent transfers and either (i) rescission of the transfers of real estate from Sears Holdings to Seritage in 2015 and return of the proceeds of the transactions between Sears Holdings and Seritage, or, in the alternative, (ii) payment by Seritage to Sears Holdings of damages at least equal to the value of the transferred property.

On February 21, 2020, the Seritage Defendants filed a partial motion to dismiss seeking dismissal of the claims in the Amended Complaint relating to the release received in the Sears Holdings derivative litigation, unjust enrichment and equitable subordination. Briefing and oral argument on the motions were completed in August 2020, and the parties are awaiting a decision.

On March 15, 2021, the Court consolidated the Litigation with a case captioned Sears Holding Corp. et al. v. Andrew H. Tisch, et al., Case No. 20-07007 (RDD) (the “Shareholder Litigation,” and, together with the Litigation, the “Consolidated Litigation”). The Shareholder Litigation was brought by the UCC (as defined below), Sears Holdings Corporation, and Sears, Roebuck and Co., against certain shareholders of Sears Holdings or its related companies. Seritage was not named as a defendant in the Shareholder Litigation, which alleges, among other things, that certain transactions undertaken by Sears Holdings since 2014 (including the July 2015 transactions giving rise to Seritage, the execution of the Original Master Lease with Sears Holdings, and the acquisition of real estate from Sears Holdings) constituted actual and/or constructive fraudulent transfers and/or illegal dividends.

On April 6, 2022, the Court entered an order in the Consolidated Litigation, upon the agreement of the parties thereto, providing for a mediation of the litigation. The parties and the Court extended the mediation several times, through August, and up until the settlement described below was reached.

On August 9, 2022, following the mediation, all of the parties to the Litigation and certain of the parties to the Shareholder Litigation (to which Seritage is not a defendant) entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which, pending final Court approval, the defendants will pay to the Sears estate $175 million (of which the Seritage Defendants will contribute approximately $35 million) in exchange for dismissal of the Consolidated Litigation and for the full and final satisfaction and release of all claims in the Consolidated Litigation (including, in the case of the Seritage Defendants, any and all claims between the Seritage Defendants and the Sears estate in the Sears bankruptcy proceeding). The settlement is subject to final Court approval, following notice and an opportunity for objections (if any) at a hearing currently scheduled for August 31, 2022. As previously disclosed, the Company remains in active litigation with its D&O insurers concerning potential coverage for the Litigation, and any amounts received from the insurers will offset the Seritage Defendants’ approximately $35 million contribution.

While the Company believes that the claims against the Seritage Defendants in the Litigation are without merit, the Company has entered into the settlement, without admitting any fault or wrongdoing, in order to avoid the continued imposition of legal defense costs, distraction, and the uncertainty and risk inherent in any litigation. If the settlement does not receive final Court approval, the Company intends to defend against the claims in the Litigation vigorously. The Company has reserved $35 million based on the Company’s contributions to the proposed settlement, subject to final Court approval, of the Litigation. This estimate is recorded as litigation reserve in the condensed consolidated statement of operations during the three and six months ended June 30, 2022.

On March 2, 2021, the Company brought a lawsuit in Delaware state court against QBE Insurance Corporation, Endurance American Insurance Company, Allianz Global Risks US Insurance Company and Continental Casualty Company, each of which are D&O insurance providers of the Company (the “D&O Insurers”). The Company’s lawsuit is seeking, among other things, declaratory relief and money damages as a result of certain of the D&O Insurers refusal to pay certain costs and expenses related to the defense of the Litigation discussed above.

In addition to the litigation described above, the Company is subject, from time to time, to various legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business and due to the current environment. While the resolution of such matters cannot be predicted with certainty, management believes, based on currently available information, that the final outcome of such matters will not have a material effect on the condensed consolidated financial position, results of operations, cash flows or liquidity of the Company. As of June 30, 2022, and December 31, 2021, the Company did not record any amounts for litigation or other matters.