Commitments and Contingencies

The Company is obligated under various operating leases for office and manufacturing space, machinery, and equipment. Future minimum lease payments under non-cancelable capital and operating leases (with initial or remaining lease terms in excess of one year) as of December 31:



	Capital		Operating	Total Future Payments
2015	$	441	96,873	97,314
2016	448		69,875	70,323
2017	323		51,811	52,134
2018	26		32,985	33,011
2019	10		21,164	21,174
Thereafter	—		24,404	24,404
Total payments	1,248		297,112	298,360
Less amount representing interest	103
Present value of capitalized lease payments	$	1,145

Rental expense under operating leases was $114,529, $116,541 and $97,587 in 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

The Company had approximately $37,381 and $47,713 in standby letters of credit for various insurance contracts and commitments to foreign vendors as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively that expire within two years.

The Company is involved in litigation from time to time in the regular course of its business. Except as noted below, there are no material legal proceedings pending or known by the Company to be contemplated to which the Company is a party or to which any of its property is subject.

Beginning in August 2010, a series of civil lawsuits were initiated in several U.S. federal courts alleging that certain manufacturers of polyurethane foam products and competitors of the Company’s carpet underlay division had engaged in price fixing in violation of U.S. antitrust laws. The Company has been named as a defendant in a number of the individual cases (the first filed on August 26, 2010), as well as in two consolidated amended class action complaints the first filed on February 28, 2011, on behalf of a class of all direct purchasers of polyurethane foam products, and the second filed on March 21, 2011, on behalf of a class of indirect purchasers. All pending cases in which the Company has been named as a defendant have been filed in or transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio for consolidated pre-trial proceedings under the name In re: Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 1:10-MDL-02196.

In these actions, the plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and/or a class of purchasers, seek damages allegedly suffered as a result of alleged overcharges in the price of polyurethane foam products from at least 1999 to the present. The direct purchaser class currently claims damages from all of the defendants named in the lawsuit of up to approximately $867,400 which amount will be reduced by the value of claims made by plaintiffs that opt out of the class. Any damages actually awarded at trial are subject to being tripled under US antitrust laws. The amount of damages in the remaining cases varies or has not yet been specified by the plaintiffs. Each plaintiff also seeks attorney fees, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, court costs and injunctive relief against future violations.

In April 2011, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the class action claims brought by the direct purchasers, and in May 2011, the Company moved to dismiss the claims brought by the indirect purchasers. On July 19, 2011, the Court denied all defendants’ motions to dismiss. On April 9, 2014, the Court certified the direct and indirect purchaser classes. The Company sought permission to appeal the certification order on April 24, 2014, and the petition was denied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on September 29, 2014. The Company has appealed the District Court’s certification order to the United States Supreme Court; this appeal is pending. Fact discovery in almost all cases is now complete and, in August 2014, the Company and other defendants filed motions for summary judgment against the direct purchaser class. In February 2015, the Court denied all summary judgment motions. The first trial (for the direct purchaser class action) is scheduled to begin on March 31, 2015.

In December 2011, the Company was named as a defendant in a Canadian Class action, Hi! Neighbor Floor Covering Co. Limited v. Hickory Springs Manufacturing Company, et al., filed in the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario, Canada and Options Consommateures v. Vitafoam, Inc. et.al., filed in the Superior Court of Justice of Quebec, Montreal, Canada, both of which allege similar claims against the Company as raised in the U.S. actions and seek unspecified damages and punitive damages. The Company denies all of the allegations in these actions and will vigorously defend itself. The Company has reached an agreement in principle to settle the Canadian actions, but the settlement has not yet been finalized.

The Company believes that adequate provisions for resolution of all contingencies, claims and pending litigation have been made for probable losses that are reasonably estimable. These contingencies are subject to significant uncertainties and we are unable to estimate the amount or range of loss, if any, in excess of amounts accrued. The Company does not believe that the ultimate outcome of these actions will have a material adverse effect on its financial condition but could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, cash flows or liquidity in a given quarter or year.

The Company is subject to various federal, state, local and foreign environmental health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing air emissions, wastewater discharges, the use, storage, treatment, recycling and disposal of solid and hazardous materials and finished product, and the cleanup of contamination associated therewith. Because of the nature of the Company’s business, the Company has incurred, and will continue to incur, costs relating to compliance with such laws and regulations. The Company is involved in various proceedings relating to environmental matters and is currently engaged in environmental investigation, remediation and post-closure care programs at certain sites. The Company has provided accruals for such activities that it has determined to be both probable and reasonably estimable. The Company does not expect that the ultimate liability with respect to such activities will have a material adverse effect on its financial condition but could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, cash flows or liquidity in a given quarter or year.