XML 71 R31.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.8
CONTINGENCIES
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2012
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]
NOTE 23 — CONTINGENCIES:
 
The Company’s policy for recording legal costs related to contingencies is to expense such legal costs as incurred.
 
Impact of the Chapter 11 Cases
 
On November 14, 2012, the Company and 180 of its subsidiaries commenced the Chapter 11 Cases in the Bankruptcy Court. Certain of the Company’s subsidiaries and affiliates (collectively, the “Non-Filing Entities”) did not file for relief under Chapter 11. The Debtors will continue to operate their businesses as “debtors-in-possession” under the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and the orders of the Bankruptcy Court. The Non-Filing Entities will continue to operate in the ordinary course of business. As a result of the filing for relief under Chapter 11, litigation against the Debtors to recover pre-petition claims or to exercise control over the property of the Debtors’ bankruptcy estates is automatically stayed pursuant to the Bankruptcy Code. See Note 3, “Bankruptcy Filing and Going Concern,” to the accompanying consolidated financial statements for additional information.
 
Class Action Lawsuits
 
Shortly after the Company filed a Current Report on Form 8-K on October 22, 2012 disclosing that on October 19, 2012 the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company, on the recommendation of management, concluded that the Company’s previously issued financial statements for at least the three years ended December 31, 2011 and associated interim periods, and for the fiscal quarters ended March 31, 2012 and June 30, 2012, should no longer be relied upon, several putative class action suits were filed in federal court in the Southern District of New York against the Company, its then President and Chief Executive Officer, its then Chief Financial Officer, its then current and certain former members of its Board of Directors, its current independent registered public accounting firm, and underwriters of the Company’s public offering of notes in March 2010 (the “Offering”). The Company’s former independent registered public accounting firm was later added as a defendant. Subsequent to the Company’s filing for relief under Chapter 11, these suits were consolidated and the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint that does not name the Company as a defendant. The consolidated suits are on behalf of purchasers of Company securities between March 1, 2010 and October 19, 2012 and purchasers of notes in the Offering. The plaintiffs allege that documents that the Company filed with the SEC were defective, inaccurate and misleading, that the plaintiffs relied on such documents in purchasing the Company’s securities, and that, as a result, the plaintiffs suffered losses. The plaintiffs seek recovery of such losses from the defendants. The Bankruptcy Court has stayed the suits against the individual defendants (the former President and former Chief Financial Officer of the Company and certain current and certain former directors of the Company), except with respect to motions to dismiss, until September 2013, subject to the Company’s right to request further extensions.
 
SEC Investigation
 
On November 13, 2012, the Company received from the staff of the SEC a request for documents relating to the statements in the Company’s October 22, 2012 Form 8-K, to which the Company has responded. On January 29, 2013, the SEC issued a formal order of private investigation of the Company. The Company intends to continue to cooperate fully with the SEC’s investigation.
 
Legal Proceedings Arising in the Ordinary Course of Business
 
The Company is a party, as plaintiff or defendant, to various suits in the ordinary course of business for monetary relief arising principally from personal injuries, collision or other casualty and to claims arising under charter parties. All such personal injury, collision or other casualty claims against the Company are covered by insurance (subject to deductibles not material in amount). Each of the claims involves an amount which, in the opinion of management, is not material to the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
 
Excise Tax Case
 
The IRS imposed penalties totaling approximately $3,500 against certain U.S. Flag vessel owning subsidiaries of the Company due to alleged delinquent excise tax registration applications and delinquent filing of information returns. The Company has denied the applicability of the penalties in question and is vigorously contesting the matter with the IRS. As a result of certain administrative protocols, the Company had to pay the assessed penalties in order to formally file suit for a refund. The Company paid $3,500 in penalties during the year-ended December 31, 2011 and such amounts are included in other receivables in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet. The Company believes, based on the merits of the case, that the likelihood of an unfavorable judgment is more than remote but less than probable. This position is supported by the Tax Division’s Office of Review’s approval of a recommendation to concede in favor of the Company’s claims and avoid a court trial. As of December 31, 2012, the recommendation is pending the final approval of the Office of the Assistant Attorney General at the U.S. Department of Justice. Accordingly, no provisions have been made in the Company’s financial statements for a potential loss as of December 31, 2012, as the Company does not believe there is any one amount within the range of likely losses (from $0 to $3,500) that is a better estimate than another.
 
Environmental Incident
 
On July 16, 2013 the Company received notification through its compliance reporting system that possible pollution violations from one of its Marshall Islands-flagged vessels had occurred. The report alleged that there had been improper discharges of bilge holding tank contents directly overboard and not, as required by Company policies and law, through the installed Oily Water Separator or to shore side reception facilities.
 
On July 26, 2013, after conducting a preliminary investigation, the Company informed the Marshall Islands Maritime Administration (the “Flag State”) of potential violations of law and the Flag State commenced an investigation. The Company has cooperated with the Flag State preliminary investigation. On July 31, 2013, the Company informed the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Department of Justice of the results of the Company’s and the Flag State’s preliminary investigations, including possible improper discharges from the vessel’s bilge holding tank and apparent false entries in, or apparent omission of required entries from, the vessel’s Oil Record Book Part I while the vessel was in U.S. waters. The Company offered to cooperate with the U.S. Coast Guard and Department of Justice in any investigation either of them wish to conduct and agreed to notify them of any new developments relating to the Company’s continuing investigation.