
16.	Legal Matters

Nevada Development Contract Litigation. In 2007, Las Vegas Development Associates, LLC (“LVDA”) agreed to purchase approximately 83 acres of land located near Las Vegas, Nevada from KB HOME Nevada Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of ours (“KB Nevada”). LVDA subsequently assigned its rights to Essex Real Estate Partners, LLC (“Essex”). KB Nevada and Essex entered into a development agreement relating to certain major infrastructure improvements. In 2008, LVDA and Essex filed a complaint in the Eighth Judicial District Court in Clark County, Nevada alleging that KB Nevada breached the development agreement, and that KB Nevada fraudulently induced them to enter into the purchase and development agreements. LVDA’s and Essex’s lenders subsequently filed related actions that were consolidated into the LVDA/Essex matter. The consolidated plaintiffs sought rescission of the agreements or, in the alternative, damages and interest. KB Nevada denied the allegations, and believed it had meritorious defenses to the consolidated plaintiffs’ claims. Following various Nevada state court decisions from 2013 to 2016 that significantly narrowed the consolidated plaintiffs’ claims and the scope of potential damages, effective March 3, 2017, KB Nevada, LVDA, Essex, the administrative agent for the LVDA/Essex lenders and a guarantor for the underlying LVDA/Essex loan reached a settlement. Under the settlement, the above-described litigation was dismissed with prejudice, with mutual releases by the parties of all claims related to the matter. As part of the settlement, KB Nevada agreed to purchase the land, if certain conditions are satisfied, on or before February 15, 2020 (subject to a potential extension of up to six months). If the conditions are not satisfied and KB Nevada does not purchase the land, it will make a specified cash payment pursuant to the settlement agreement that is not material to our consolidated financial statements. This settlement did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements for the three-month or nine-month periods ended August 31, 2017.

San Diego Water Board Notice of Violation. In August 2015, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region (“RWQCB”) issued to us and another homebuilder a Notice of Violation (“NOV”) alleging violations of the California Water Code and waste discharge prohibitions of the water quality control plan for the San Diego Region (Basin Plan). According to the NOV, the alleged violations involved the unpermitted discharge of fill material into the waters of the United States and California during the grading of a required secondary access road for a community located in San Diego County, California. The work was performed pursuant to a County-issued grading permit and in reliance on third-party experts. In its NOV, the RWQCB requested to meet with us to discuss the alleged violations as part of its process to determine whether to bring any enforcement action, and we have met with the RWQCB staff in an effort to resolve the matters alleged in the NOV. An administrative hearing before the RWQCB was originally scheduled for August 10, 2016, but was continued pending ongoing discussions with the RWQCB staff. On May 26, 2017, we and the RWQCB staff reached a settlement regarding the matters alleged in the NOV, and agreed to a stipulated administrative order in lieu of formal administrative proceedings. On August 30, 2017, the RWQCB, through its authorized delegate, approved the stipulated administrative order. Under the stipulated administrative order, we agreed to pay a total of $.3 million and to enhance certain of our land development procedures. We are also seeking recovery of the costs associated with this matter from responsible parties. The stipulated administrative order did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements for the three-month or nine-month periods ended August 31, 2017.

Other Matters. In addition to the specific proceedings described above, we are involved in other litigation and regulatory proceedings incidental to our business that are in various procedural stages. We believe that the accruals we have recorded for probable and reasonably estimable losses with respect to these proceedings are adequate and that, as of August 31, 2017, it was not reasonably possible that an additional material loss had been incurred in an amount in excess of the estimated amounts already recognized in our consolidated financial statements. We evaluate our accruals for litigation and regulatory proceedings at least quarterly and, as appropriate, adjust them to reflect (a) the facts and circumstances known to us at the time, including information regarding negotiations, settlements, rulings and other relevant events and developments; (b) the advice and analyses of counsel; and (c) the assumptions and judgment of management. Similar factors and considerations are used in establishing new accruals for proceedings as to which losses have become probable and reasonably estimable at the time an evaluation is made. Based on our experience, we believe that the amounts that may be claimed or alleged against us in these proceedings are not a meaningful indicator of our potential liability. The outcome of any of these proceedings, including the defense and other litigation-related costs and expenses we may incur, however, is inherently uncertain and could differ significantly from the estimate reflected in a related accrual, if made. Therefore, it is possible that the ultimate outcome of any proceeding, if in excess of a related accrual or if an accrual had not been made, could be material to our consolidated financial statements.