XML 47 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.8
Note 10 - Legal Proceedings
6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2014
Note 10 - Legal Proceedings  
Note 10 - Legal Proceedings

NOTE 10 – LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

 

In February 2012, Trunity and the Company’s former CEO Terry Anderton were served with a complaint filed by an ex-Trunity, employee, William Horn, in the Nashua, New Hampshire, Superior Court. The plaintiff served as Executive Vice President of Marketing & Business Development from March until August 2011 at an annual salary of $100,000. He asserted whistleblower status and alleged that he was wrongfully terminated because of his allegations that the Company had violated securities, tax and employment laws. The complaint sought unspecified damages under the New Hampshire Whistleblower Act and common law, including reinstatement, back pay and attorney’s fees and costs. In May 2012, the Company responded to the complaint by denying all material allegations and filing a counterclaim against the plaintiff for breach of contract, tortious interference with contractual and business relations, breach of fiduciary duty and violation of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. Substantial discovery was taken. 

 

On June 13, 2013, the Court granted the Company Motion to Dismiss Terry Anderton, in his individual capacity, from the case. Therefore, Trunity remained the sole defendant in this matter.

 

Trial of the case was scheduled for the weeks of June 16 and June 23, 2014.

 

On April 14, 2014, the parties mediated the case and settlement terms reached.  On May 8, 2014, following mediation, Mr. Horn signed a Confidential Settlement Agreement and General Release, which became effective on the eighth day following his signature.  The case was settled based on Trunity’s agreement to pay $60,000 to Mr. Horn, less applicable withholding and taxes, as well as confidentiality provisions, non-disparagement,  and the parties exchanging mutual releases.  The settlement payment was made by the insurance company, which has paid all costs of the litigation above the $50,000 deductible.  The parties filed Docket Markings bringing the case to conclusion.