NOTE 20 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Litigation

On November 16, 2017, a purported securities class action complaint captioned Dror Gronich v. Omega Healthcare Investors, Inc., C. Taylor Pickett, Robert O. Stephenson, and Daniel J. Booth was filed against the Company and certain of its officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”), Case No. 1:17-cv-08983-NRB. On November 17, 2017, a second purported securities class action complaint captioned Steve Klein v. Omega Healthcare Investors, Inc., C. Taylor Pickett, Robert O. Stephenson, and Daniel J. Booth was filed against the Company and the same officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Case No. 1:17-cv-09024-NRB. Thereafter, the Court considered a series of applications by various shareholders to be named lead plaintiff, consolidated the two actions and designated Royce Setzer as the lead plaintiff.

Pursuant to a Scheduling Order entered by the Court, lead plaintiff Setzer and additional plaintiff Earl Holtzman filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint on May 25, 2018 (the “Securities Class Action”). The Securities Class Action purports to be a class action brought on behalf of shareholders who acquired the Company’s securities between May 3, 2017 and October 31, 2017. The Securities Class Action alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), by making materially false and/or misleading statements, and by failing to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects, including the financial and operating results of one of the Company’s operators, the ability of such operator to make timely rent payments, and the impairment of certain of the Company’s leases and the uncollectibility of certain receivables. The Securities Class Action, which purports to assert claims for violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, as well as Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, seeks an unspecified amount of monetary damages, interest, fees and expenses of attorneys and experts, and other relief. The Company and the officers named in the Securities Class Action filed a Motion to Dismiss on July 17, 2018. Briefing on the Motion to Dismiss is complete, and the Court heard Oral Argument on February 13, 2019.

Although the Company denies the material allegations of the Securities Class Action and intends to vigorously pursue its defense, we are in the early stages of this litigation and are unable to predict the outcome of the case or to estimate the amount of potential costs.

The Board of Directors received a demand letter, dated April 9, 2018, from an attorney for Phillip Swan (“Swan”), a purported current shareholder of the Company relating to the subject matter covered by the Securities Class Action (the “Shareholder Demand”). The letter demanded that the Board of Directors conduct an investigation into the statements and other matters at issue in the Securities Class Action and commence legal proceedings against each party identified as being responsible for the alleged activities. After due consideration, and in the exercise of its business judgment, the Board determined that it is not in the best interests of the Company to commence litigation against any current or former officers or directors based on the matters raised in the Shareholder Demand. The Board has also received shareholder demands from two additional purported shareholders, each represented by the same counsel, that were substantively identical to the Shareholder Demand and reached the same conclusion with respect to those demands.

On August 22, 2018, Stourbridge Investments LLC, a purported shareholder of ours, filed a derivative action purportedly on behalf of the Company in the Court against the current directors of the Company as well as certain officers alleging violations of Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and state-law claims including breach of fiduciary duty. Stourbridge Investments LLC v. Callen et al., No. 1:18-cv-07638. The complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants are responsible for the Company’s failure to disclose the financial condition of Orianna Health Systems, the alleged non-disclosures that are also the subject of the Securities Class Action described above. The defendants in the action are the three individual defendants named in the Securities Class Action (Messrs. Pickett, Booth and Stephenson), as well as the Company’s non-management directors. The plaintiff did not make a demand on the Company to bring the action prior to filing it, but rather alleges that demand would have been futile. The parties have entered into a stipulation in which they agreed to stay the case, including any response by defendants, pending the entry of judgment or a voluntary dismissal with prejudice in the Securities Class Action. The agreed-upon stipulation and order to stay the case were entered by the Court on October 25, 2018. In addition, on January 30, 2019, Swan filed a derivative action in the Baltimore City Circuit Court of Maryland, purportedly on behalf of the Company against certain current and former directors of the Company as well as certain officers, asserting claims for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment. Swan v. Pickett, et al.,No. 24-C-19-000573. Swan alleges that the Derivative Demand was wrongfully refused. No response date for the defendants has yet come due.

In addition, we are subject to various other legal proceedings, claims and other actions arising out of the normal course of business. While any legal proceeding or claim has an element of uncertainty, management believes that the outcome of each lawsuit, claim or legal proceeding that is pending or threatened, or all of them combined, will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations.

Commitments

We have committed to fund the construction of new leased and mortgaged facilities and other capital improvements. We expect the funding of these commitments to be completed over the next several years. Our remaining commitments at December 31, 2018, are outlined in the table below (in thousands):



Total commitment	$	586,800
Amounts funded (1)		(373,696)
Remaining commitment	$	213,104

(1)

Includes finance costs.

Environmental Matters

As of December 31, 2018 and 2017, we had identified conditional asset retirement obligations primarily related to the future removal and disposal of asbestos that is contained within certain of our real estate investment properties. The asbestos is appropriately contained, and we believe we are compliant with current environmental regulations. If these properties undergo major renovations or are demolished, certain environmental regulations are in place, which specify the manner in which asbestos must be handled and disposed. We are required to record the fair value of these conditional liabilities if they can be reasonably estimated. As of December 31, 2018 and 2017, no liability for conditional asset retirement obligations was recorded on our accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.