From time to time, the Company is a party to legal proceedings, lawsuits and other claims that arise in the ordinary course of the Company's business. Except as described in this Note 12, the Company is not aware of any other legal proceedings or claims that it believes may have, individually or taken together, a material adverse effect on the Company's business, prospects, financial condition or results of operations. The Company's policy is to accrue legal expenses as they are incurred.

On May 3, 2007, Ventas, Inc. ("Ventas") filed a complaint against the Company in the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky alleging, among other things, that the Company interfered with Ventas's prospective business advantage in connection with Ventas's 2007 acquisition of Sunrise Senior Living Real Estate Investment Trust ("Sunrise REIT"). Ventas sought compensatory damages in excess of $300 million plus punitive damages. Prior to the jury deliberations, the District Court dismissed, among other rulings, Ventas's claim for punitive damages. On September 4, 2009, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Ventas in the amount of approximately $102 million. The Company recognized $102 million as a provision for litigation expense during the three months ended September 30, 2009. Both Ventas and the Company appealed various rulings of the District Court and the jury verdict to the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. On May 17, 2011, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the District Court erred by not submitting Ventas's claim for punitive damages to the jury, and affirmed the District Court's judgment in all other respects. On August 23, 2011, the Company paid Ventas $102 million resulting from the jury verdict. On November 9, 2011, the Company and Ventas settled all claims relating to the litigation and the Company paid $125 million to Ventas in addition to the $102 million paid in August 2011.

On June 29, 2009, several of the Company's subsidiaries, together with three of its tenants, filed complaints in the Delaware Court of Chancery (the "Court of Chancery") against Sunrise Senior Living, Inc. and three of its subsidiaries ("Sunrise"). One of the complaints, which related to four of the 64 communities subject to the dispute, was removed on July 24, 2009 to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (the "Virginia District Court"). On April 30, 2010, the Virginia District Court dismissed all claims before it, and each party filed a notice of appeal regarding the decision with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

On August 31, 2010, the Company entered into agreements with Sunrise in which: (i) the Company acquired the right to terminate management contracts on 27 of the 75 senior housing communities owned by the Company (these 27 communities were leased to tenants that had entered into management contracts with Sunrise); (ii) Sunrise agreed to limit certain fees and charges associated with the in-place management contracts of the remaining 48 communities, where such limitations were consistent with the parties' budgetary rights and obligations under existing agreements; (iii) the Company agreed to fund certain capital expenditures at the remaining 48 communities, and (iv) both parties dismissed all of the previous litigation proceedings that were filed against each other. The Company agreed to pay Sunrise $50 million for the right to terminate the management contracts of the 27 communities; after taking into account the rights to approximately $9 million of working capital that the Company received in conjunction with acquiring these termination rights, the net cost to acquire the termination rights was $41 million. The Company had marketed for lease the 27 communities to a limited group of operators, and prior to August 31, 2010, had received a favorable bid and an executed non-binding term sheet from Emeritus Corporation ("Emeritus"). On October 18, 2010, the Company executed two triple-net master leases with Emeritus for the 27 communities on terms consistent with a non-binding term sheet agreed to by the Company and Emeritus in August 2010, including fixed lease terms of 15 years and two 10 year extension options. Shortly thereafter, on October 31, 2010, the Company exercised its rights under the existing lease contracts to terminate the leases with the tenants that had entered into the management contracts with Sunrise for a payment of $2 million. The term of the new Emeritus leases commenced on November 1, 2010, immediately after such termination.

The Company capitalized the $41 million cost for the above termination rights as an initial direct leasing cost of the new leases as it determined that: (i) acquiring the right to terminate Sunrise's long-term management contracts was essential to enable the Company to lease such communities to another operator; and (ii) prior to August 31, 2010, the leasing transaction with Emeritus was reasonably assured. The initial direct leasing costs will be amortized over the initial 15-year term of the new leases with Emeritus. Further, the Company concluded that no amount of the $50 million paid to Sunrise should be allocated to the dismissed litigation or to the existing leases on the 48 remaining communities, because the Company believed that: (i) as ruled by the Virginia District Court, Sunrise's counterclaims lacked merit and had no value, and the claims remaining in the Chancery Court arose from similar facts and were expected to be decided on the basis of similar law; (ii) Sunrise's agreement to limit certain fees on the remaining 48 communities, and the Company's agreement to fund certain capital expenditures at the communities, were each consistent with the Company's and Sunrise's obligations, respectively under the existing agreements; and (iii) the incremental value gained by the reasonably assured future rents from Emeritus and the acquired working capital exceeded the payment to Sunrise.

Concentrations of credit risks arise when a number of operators, tenants or obligors related to the Company's investments are engaged in similar business activities, or activities in the same geographic region, or have similar economic features that would cause their ability to meet contractual obligations, including those to the Company, to be similarly affected by changes in economic conditions. The Company regularly monitors various segments of its portfolio to assess potential concentrations of risks. Management believes the current portfolio is reasonably diversified across healthcare related real estate and does not contain any other significant concentration of credit risks, except as disclosed herein. The Company does not have significant foreign operations.

The following table provides information regarding the Company's concentration with respect to certain operators; the information provided is presented for the gross assets and revenues that are associated with certain operators as percentages of the respective segment's and total Company's gross assets and revenues:

	Percentage of Senior Housing Gross Assets				Percentage of Senior Housing Revenues

	December 31,				Year Ended December 31,
Operators	2011		2010		2011		2010		2009
HCR ManorCare(1)		14		—		10		—		—
Brookdale(2)		16		16		24		18		20
Emeritus(3)		18		26		23		19		16
Sunrise(3)(4)		22		30		18		29		38

	Percentage of Total Company Gross Assets				Percentage of Total Company Revenues

	December 31,				Year Ended December 31,
Operators	2011		2010		2011		2010		2009
HCR ManorCare(1)		35		12		27		9		7
Brookdale(2)		5		5		7		5		6
Emeritus(3)		6		8		7		6		5
Sunrise(3)(4)		7		10		6		9		11

(1): On April 7, 2011, the Company completed the acquisition of HCR ManorCare's real estate assets, which included the settlement of the Company's HCR ManorCare debt investments, see Notes 3 and 7 for additional information.
(2): For the year ended December 31, 2011, Brookdale percentages exclude $47.1 million of senior housing, related to 21 senior housing facilities that Brookdale operates on our behalf under a RIDEA structure. Assuming that these revenues were attributable to Brookdale, the percentage of segment and total revenues for Brookdale would be 33% and 10%, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2011. Assuming that these assets were attributable to Brookdale, the percentage of segment and total assets for Brookdale would be 27% and 9%, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2011.
(3): 27 properties formerly operated by Sunrise were transitioned to Emeritus effective November 1, 2010. For the year ended December 31, 2010, Sunrise percentages exclude $32.6 million of revenues for 27 properties due to the consolidation of four VIEs from August 31 2010 to November 1, 2010. Assuming that these revenues were attributable to Sunrise, the percentage of segment and total revenues for Sunrise would be 37% and 11%, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2010.
(4): Certain of our properties are leased to tenants who have entered into management contracts with Sunrise to operate the respective property on their behalf. To determine the Company's concentration of revenues generated from properties operated by Sunrise, we aggregate revenue from these tenants with revenue generated from the two properties that are leased directly to Sunrise.

On September 1, 2011, the Company completed a strategic venture with Brookdale that includes the operation of 37 HCP-owned senior living communities previously leased to or operated by Horizon Bay Retirement Living ("Horizon Bay"). As part of this transaction, Brookdale acquired Horizon Bay and: (i) assumed an existing triple-net lease for nine HCP communities; (ii) entered into a new triple-net lease related to four HCP communities; (iii) assumed Horizon Bay's management of three HCP communities, one of which was recently developed by HCP; and (iv) entered into management contracts and a joint venture agreement for a 10% interest in the real estate and operations for 21 of the Company's communities that are in a RIDEA structure. In connection with these transactions, the Company purchased $22.4 million of Brookdale's common stock in June 2011 (see Note 10 for additional information regarding these marketable equity securities).

Under the provisions of RIDEA, a REIT may lease "qualified health care properties" on an arm's length basis to a TRS if the property is operated on behalf of such subsidiary by a person who qualifies as an "eligible independent contractor." The year ended December 31, 2011 includes $47.1 million and $29.8 million in revenues and operating expenses, respectively, as a result of reflecting the facility-level results for the 21 RIDEA facilities operated by Brookdale beginning September 1, 2011.

The year ended December 31, 2010 includes increases of $29.4 million and $25.9 million in revenues and operating expenses, respectively, as a result of reflecting the facility-level results for 27 facilities leased to four VIE tenants operated by Sunrise that were consolidated, for the period from August 31, 2010 to November 1, 2010, as a result of the termination rights the Company acquired from the settlement agreement discussed above. See Note 21 for additional information regarding VIEs.

On October 1, 2009, the Company completed the transition of management agreements on 15 communities operated by Sunrise that were previously terminated for Sunrise's failure to achieve certain performance thresholds. The transition of these facilities to new operators reduced the Company's Sunrise-managed facilities in its portfolio to 75 communities. The termination of the management agreements did not require the payment of a termination fee to Sunrise by its tenants or the Company. On June 30, 2009, the Company recognized impairments of $6 million related to intangible assets associated with 12 of the 15 communities.

To mitigate credit risk of leasing properties to certain senior housing and post-acute/skilled nursing operators, leases with operators are often combined into portfolios that contain cross-default terms, so that if a tenant of any of the properties in a portfolio defaults on its obligations under its lease, the Company may pursue its remedies under the lease with respect to any of the properties in the portfolio. Certain portfolios also contain terms whereby the net operating profits of the properties are combined for the purpose of securing the funding of rental payments due under each lease.

At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Company's gross real estate assets in the state of California, excluding assets held-for-sale, represented approximately 23% and 26% of the Company's total assets, respectively.

In connection with the formation of certain DownREIT limited liability companies ("LLCs"), members may contribute appreciated real estate to a DownREIT LLC in exchange for DownREIT units. These contributions are generally tax-deferred, so that the pre-contribution gain related to the property is not taxed to the member. However, if a contributed property is later sold by the DownREIT LLC, the unamortized pre-contribution gain that exists at the date of sale is specifically allocated and taxed to the contributing members. In many of the DownREITs, the Company has entered into indemnification agreements with those members who contributed appreciated property into the DownREIT LLC. Under these indemnification agreements, if any of the appreciated real estate contributed by the members is sold by the DownREIT LLC in a taxable transaction within a specified number of years, the Company will reimburse the affected members for the federal and state income taxes associated with the pre-contribution gain that is specially allocated to the affected member under the Code ("make-whole payments"). These make-whole payments include a tax gross-up provision. These indemnification agreements have expiration terms that range through 2020.

Certain of the Company's senior housing facilities serve as collateral for $123 million of debt (maturing May 1, 2025) that is owed by a previous owner of the facilities. This indebtedness is guaranteed by the previous owner who has an investment grade credit rating. These senior housing facilities, which are classified as DFLs, had a carrying value of $370 million as of December 31, 2011.

The Company monitors its properties for the presence of hazardous or toxic substances. The Company is not aware of any environmental liability with respect to the properties that would have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition or results of operations. The Company carries environmental insurance and believes that the policy terms, conditions, limitations and deductibles are adequate and appropriate under the circumstances, given the relative risk of loss, the cost of such coverage and current industry practice.

The Company obtains various types of insurance to mitigate the impact of property, business interruption, liability, flood, windstorm, earthquake, environmental and terrorism related losses. The Company attempts to obtain appropriate policy terms, conditions, limits and deductibles considering the relative risk of loss, the cost of such coverage and current industry practice. There are, however, certain types of extraordinary losses, such as those due to acts of war or other events that may be either uninsurable or not economically insurable. In addition, the Company has a large number of properties that are exposed to earthquake, flood and windstorm occurrences for which the related insurances carry high deductibles. Should a significant uninsured loss occur at a property, the Company's assets may become impaired.

Certain leases contain purchase options whereby the tenant may elect to acquire the underlying real estate. Annualized lease payments (base rent only) to be received from these leases, including DFLs, subject to purchase options, in the year that the purchase options are exercisable, are summarized as follows (dollars in thousands):

Year	Annualized Base Rent

2012	$	14,232	8
2013		34,759	16
2014		36,515	15
2015		16,115	14
2016		40,203	21
Thereafter		94,339	57

	$	236,163	131

The Company's rental expense attributable to continuing operations for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 was approximately $6.2 million, $5.9 million and $6.0 million, respectively. These rental expense amounts include ground rent and other leases. Ground leases generally require fixed annual rent payments and may also include escalation clauses and renewal options. These leases have terms that are up to 99 years, excluding extension options. Future minimum lease obligations under non-cancelable ground and other operating leases as of December 31, 2011 were as follows (in thousands):

Year	Amount

2012	$	5,455
2013		5,544
2014		4,928
2015		4,650
2016		3,705
Thereafter		178,430

	$	202,712