Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies	6. Commitments and Contingencies We are subject to certain legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and have not been fully adjudicated. In our opinion, we do not have a potential liability related to any current legal proceedings and claims that would individually or in the aggregate have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or operating results. However, the results of legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty. Should we fail to prevail in any of these legal matters or should all of these legal matters be resolved against us in the same reporting period, the operating results of a particular reporting period could be materially adversely affected. Litigation-Lehman and T. Rowe Price Complaint On February 14, 2013, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (“LBHI”) brought a claim against us in the Delaware Court of Chancery (the “Court”) seeking, among other things, a declaratory judgment that as a result of non-payment of dividends, a Voting Rights Triggering Event had occurred pursuant to the certificate of designations for the Series B preferred stock (the “Certificate of Designations”) no later than July 15, 2010. LBHI alleged that as a result, we were prohibited from incurring indebtedness but did so for the purposes of purchasing assets relating to our Houston television station and the issuance of our 12.5% Senior Secured Notes due 2017 (the “Notes”). LBHI also sought an award of unspecified contract damages. We filed a motion to dismiss the LBHI complaint on March 11, 2013. On April 25, 2013, LBHI filed an opposition to our motion to dismiss and a motion for partial summary judgment. We filed a reply in further support of our motion to dismiss and in opposition to LBHI’s motion for partial summary judgment on May 10, 2013. A hearing on the parties’ motions was held on May 20, 2013, at which the Court requested further briefing on cross-motions for summary judgment. Additionally, on June 17, 2013, T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund, Inc., T. Rowe Price Institutional High Yield Fund, T. Rowe Price Funds SICAV-Global High Yield Bond Fund and T. Rowe Price Small-Cap Value Fund, Inc. (collectively “T. Rowe Price” and with LBHI, the “Plaintiffs”) brought a claim against us making allegations substantially similar to those made by LBHI previously, except with an additional claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. On July 3, 2013, the Court granted the Plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate their lawsuits; and on October 3, 2013, LBHI moved to amend its original complaint by adding a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. We moved for judgment on the pleadings as to both T. Rowe Price’s and LBHI’s good faith and fair dealing claims. In addition, we and the Plaintiffs submitted cross-motions for summary judgment on October 31, 2013. On February 25, 2014, Vice Chancellor Glasscock rendered the opinion of the Court granting our motions for summary judgment and judgment on the pleadings, and denying the Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed. On April 8, 2014, LBHI filed a Notice of Appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court. T. Rowe Price did not file a Notice of Appeal, and the appeal deadline has now passed. LBHI's Opening Brief on appeal was filed on May 27, 2014, and our Answering Brief on appeal and Opening Brief on cross-appeal was filed on June 26, 2014. Scheduling of subsequent briefing will depend on the date on which LBHI files its Reply Brief on appeal and Answering Brief on cross-appeal. Brevan Howard and Others Complaint On December 27, 2013, River Birch Master Fund, L.P., P River Birch Ltd. (together, “River Birch”) and Visium Catalyst Credit Master Fund, Ltd. (collectively with River Birch, “Initial Plaintiffs”) brought a claim against us in the Court seeking a declaratory judgment that a Voting Rights Triggering Event had occurred (as of April 15, 2010) under our Certificate of Designations as a result of our non-payment of dividends. The claim states that as a result of such Voting Rights Triggering Event, the incurrence of indebtedness for the purpose of purchasing our Houston television station and the issuance of our Notes under the Indenture governing the Notes were prohibited incurrences of indebtedness under the Certificate of Designations. The Initial Plaintiffs further claim that we violated the Certificate of Designations by failing to take any actions or explore any options that would have given us legally available funds with which to repurchase the outstanding Series B preferred stock on October 15, 2013. In connection with their claims, Initial Plaintiffs also seek an award of contract damages. On January 17, 2014, we filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On March 3, 2014, the complaint was amended to remove River Birch and add Brevan Howard Credit Catalyst Master Fund Ltd., Brevan Howard Master Fund, ALJ Capital I, LP, ALJ Capital II, LP, LJR Capital, LP, and Cedarview Opportunities Master Fund, LP as additional plaintiffs. Plaintiffs filed an answering brief to our Motion to Dismiss on April 30, 2014. Our reply brief was filed on May 16, 2014, and a hearing was held on our Motion to Dismiss on June 10, 2014. Following the hearing, the parties agreed to stay all proceedings relating to Counts I, II and IV of the complaint. On June 27, 2014, the Court denied our motion to dismiss Count III of the complaint. We deny the allegations contained in the complaint and, to the contrary, assert that we have been and continue to be in full and complete compliance with all of our obligations under the Certificate of Designations, as fully disclosed in our public filings dating back to 2009. Accordingly, we believe that the complaint’s allegations are frivolous and wholly without merit and intend to contest such allegations vigorously.

6. Commitments and Contingencies

We are subject to certain legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and have not been fully adjudicated. In our opinion, we do not have a potential liability related to any current legal proceedings and claims that would individually or in the aggregate have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or operating results. However, the results of legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty. Should we fail to prevail in any of these legal matters or should all of these legal matters be resolved against us in the same reporting period, the operating results of a particular reporting period could be materially adversely affected.

Litigation-Lehman and T. Rowe Price Complaint

On February 14, 2013, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (“LBHI”) brought a claim against us in the Delaware Court of Chancery (the “Court”) seeking, among other things, a declaratory judgment that as a result of non-payment of dividends, a Voting Rights Triggering Event had occurred pursuant to the certificate of designations for the Series B preferred stock (the “Certificate of Designations”) no later than July 15, 2010. LBHI alleged that as a result, we were prohibited from incurring indebtedness but did so for the purposes of purchasing assets relating to our Houston television station and the issuance of our 12.5% Senior Secured Notes due 2017 (the “Notes”). LBHI also sought an award of unspecified contract damages.

We filed a motion to dismiss the LBHI complaint on March 11, 2013. On April 25, 2013, LBHI filed an opposition to our motion to dismiss and a motion for partial summary judgment. We filed a reply in further support of our motion to dismiss and in opposition to LBHI’s motion for partial summary judgment on May 10, 2013. A hearing on the parties’ motions was held on May 20, 2013, at which the Court requested further briefing on cross-motions for summary judgment.

Additionally, on June 17, 2013, T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund, Inc., T. Rowe Price Institutional High Yield Fund, T. Rowe Price Funds SICAV-Global High Yield Bond Fund and T. Rowe Price Small-Cap Value Fund, Inc. (collectively “T. Rowe Price” and with LBHI, the “Plaintiffs”) brought a claim against us making allegations substantially similar to those made by LBHI previously, except with an additional claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

On July 3, 2013, the Court granted the Plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate their lawsuits; and on October 3, 2013, LBHI moved to amend its original complaint by adding a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. We moved for judgment on the pleadings as to both T. Rowe Price’s and LBHI’s good faith and fair dealing claims. In addition, we and the Plaintiffs submitted cross-motions for summary judgment on October 31, 2013.

On February 25, 2014, Vice Chancellor Glasscock rendered the opinion of the Court granting our motions for summary judgment and judgment on the pleadings, and denying the Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed. On April 8, 2014, LBHI filed a Notice of Appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court. T. Rowe Price did not file a Notice of Appeal, and the appeal deadline has now passed. LBHI's Opening Brief on appeal was filed on May 27, 2014, and our Answering Brief on appeal and Opening Brief on cross-appeal was filed on June 26, 2014. Scheduling of subsequent briefing will depend on the date on which LBHI files its Reply Brief on appeal and Answering Brief on cross-appeal.

Brevan Howard and Others Complaint

On December 27, 2013, River Birch Master Fund, L.P., P River Birch Ltd. (together, “River Birch”) and Visium Catalyst Credit Master Fund, Ltd. (collectively with River Birch, “Initial Plaintiffs”) brought a claim against us in the Court seeking a declaratory judgment that a Voting Rights Triggering Event had occurred (as of April 15, 2010) under our Certificate of Designations as a result of our non-payment of dividends. The claim states that as a result of such Voting Rights Triggering Event, the incurrence of indebtedness for the purpose of purchasing our Houston television station and the issuance of our Notes under the Indenture governing the Notes were prohibited incurrences of indebtedness under the Certificate of Designations.

The Initial Plaintiffs further claim that we violated the Certificate of Designations by failing to take any actions or explore any options that would have given us legally available funds with which to repurchase the outstanding Series B preferred stock on October 15, 2013. In connection with their claims, Initial Plaintiffs also seek an award of contract damages. On January 17, 2014, we filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On March 3, 2014, the complaint was amended to remove River Birch and add Brevan Howard Credit Catalyst Master Fund Ltd., Brevan Howard Master Fund, ALJ Capital I, LP, ALJ Capital II, LP, LJR Capital, LP, and Cedarview Opportunities Master Fund, LP as additional plaintiffs. Plaintiffs filed an answering brief to our Motion to Dismiss on April 30, 2014. Our reply brief was filed on May 16, 2014, and a hearing was held on our Motion to Dismiss on June 10, 2014. Following the hearing, the parties agreed to stay all proceedings relating to Counts I, II and IV of the complaint. On June 27, 2014, the Court denied our motion to dismiss Count III of the complaint. We deny the allegations contained in the complaint and, to the contrary, assert that we have been and continue to be in full and complete compliance with all of our obligations under the Certificate of Designations, as fully disclosed in our public filings dating back to 2009. Accordingly, we believe that the complaint’s allegations are frivolous and wholly without merit and intend to contest such allegations vigorously.