XML 25 R14.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.4.0.3
Commitments and Contingencies
3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies
Legal Proceedings
Monticello Raceway Management, Inc. v. Concord Associates L.P.
On January 25, 2011, Empire’s subsidiary, MRMI, filed a complaint in the Sullivan County Court against Concord, an affiliate of Louis R. Cappelli who was a significant stockholder. The lawsuit seeks amounts that MRMI believes is owed to it under an agreement between Concord, MRMI and the MHHA (the “2008 MHHA Agreement”). Pursuant to the 2008 MHHA Agreement, until the earlier to occur of the commencement of operations at the gaming facilities to be developed by Concord at the site of the former Concord hotel and former Concord resort or July 31, 2011, MRMI was to continue to pay to the MHHA 8.75% of the net win from VGM activities at Monticello Casino and Raceway, and Concord was to pay the difference, if any, between $5 million per year and 8.75% of the net win from VGM activities (“VGM Shortfall”) during such period. As of December 31, 2010, MRMI believes Concord owed it approximately $300,000 for the VGM Shortfall. Concord has contested its responsibility to make such VGM Shortfall payments to MRMI. In its Decision and Order, dated January 15, 2014, the Sullivan County Supreme Court awarded damages to MRMI in the approximate amount of $308,000 plus interest and costs. On February 4, 2014, Concord filed a Notice of Appeal with the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court, Third Department ("Third Department"). The oral argument on the appeal was heard by the Third Department on April 28, 2015 and the Third Department determined that the damages to MRMI should be reduced to $122,562. On July 8, 2015, we filed a Notice of Motion for Re-Argument and Leave to Appeal (the "Motion") regarding the decision of the Third Department. The Motion was denied by the Third Department on September 2, 2015. On October 9, 2015, we filed a Motion for Leave to Appeal with the Court of Appeals. In an opinion dated November 24, 2015, the Court of Appeals denied our Motion for Leave to Appeal. The Appellate Division had remanded the case to the trial court for a recomputation of the amount of the judgment. In an Order and Amended Judgment dated December 22, 2015, MRMI was awarded a judgment in the amount of $183,097. MRMI received payment of its judgment on April 15, 2016 in the amount of approximately $188,000.
Concord Associates, L.P. v. Entertainment Properties Trust
On September 18, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (“SDNY”) granted Motions to Dismiss filed by the Company and all other defendants. This lawsuit was filed in March 2012, by Concord and various affiliates in the SDNY and asserted in an amended complaint various federal antitrust claims against the Company, EPR, EPT, Genting NY LLC and Kien Huat. The lawsuit arises out of the Company's exclusivity agreement and option agreement with EPT to develop the site of the EPT Property located in Sullivan County, New York. Concord brought federal antitrust claims alleging conspiracy in restraint of trade, conspiracy to monopolize and monopolization. Concord also brought state law claims for tortious interference with contract and business relations. Concord sought damages in an amount to be determined at trial but not less than subject to automatic trebling under federal antitrust laws), unspecified punitive damages and permanent injunctive relief. In its decision, the SDNY dismissed Concord’s federal antitrust claims with prejudice and dismissed Concord's state law claims without prejudice. On March 18, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed SDNY's dismissal of Concord's complaint.

Other Proceedings
The Company is a party from time to time to various other legal actions that arise in the normal course of business. In the opinion of management, the resolution of these other matters will not have a material and adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Operating leases

The following table represents the minimum lease payments under the Company's operating leases:
 
 
Payments due by Period
 
 
(in thousands)
Year ending December 31,
 
Total Lease Payments
 
 
 
2016
 
$
1,000

2017
 
10,000

2018
 
10,500

2019
 
7,750

2020
 
7,800

2021 to 2056
 
378,574

Total
 
$
415,624