COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2015
Commitments and contingenciestextblock
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	NOTE 12. COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES AND LIQUIDITY Litigation The Company and its subsidiaries, from time to time, have been involved in various items of litigation incidental to and in the ordinary course of its business and, in the opinion of management; the outcome of such litigation will not have a material adverse impact upon the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. In 2005, IOT purchased 10.08 acres of land, located in Dallas County, Texas, from TCI, a related party, and obtained 3^rd party financing. On August 2, 2011, the property was sold to ABCLD Real Estate, LLC ("ABCLD"), a related party. Ownership of this property was subsequently transferred from ABCLD to the lender through foreclosure procedures. On April 27, 2012, ABCLD filed a lawsuit for wrongful foreclosure against the lender. On September 9, 2014, the court entered a final judgement declaring that the foreclosure was void as a matter of law. ABCLD subsequently paid $7 million to get the property back. The plaintiffs appealed the final judgement and alleged that ABCLD and other various entities were responsible for deficiencies, unpaid interest and related attorney fees. With the $7 million that was applied to the outstanding loan balance, the potential loss is significantly reduced, and the amount of final damages is contingent upon the outcome of the appeal. As part of a settlement agreement, ABCLD paid an additional $2.6 million to regain ownership of the parcel. As of December 31, 2015 the Company has no further obligations related to this parcel. ART and ART Midwest, Inc. In August 2014, David M. Clapper and two entities related to Mr. Clapper (all, collectively, the “Clapper Parties”) filed a complaint in the U. S. District Court against the Company, its directors and certain of its officers alleging purported transactions to the detriment of the Clapper Parties and others by transferring assets, cash and diverting property. Management of the Company believes that there is no basis for this action against the Company and its officers and directors and intends to vigorously defend itself. The August 2014 complaint does not allege any facts relating to the Company, except that the named directors and officers are directors and officers of the Company and that the Company is a Nevada corporation, with its headquarters/principal place of business in Dallas, Texas. The case arises over other litigation, commenced in 1999, among the Clapper Parties and American Realty Trust, Inc. (“ART”) and its former subsidiary, ART Midwest, Inc., originally arising out of a transaction in 1998, in which ART and the Clapper Parties were to form a partnership to own eight residential apartment complexes. Over the ensuing years, a number of rulings, both for and against ART and ART Midwest, Inc., were issued, resulting in a ruling in October 2011, under which the Clapper Parties were awarded an initial judgment for approximately $74 million, including $26 million in actual damages and $48 million in interest. The 2011 ruling was only against ART and ART Midwest, Inc., but no other entity. During February 2014, the Court of Appeals affirmed a portion of the judgment in favor of the Clapper Parties but also ruled that a double counting of a significant portion of the damages had occurred and remanded the case back to the trial court to recalculate the damage award, as well as pre- and post-judgment interest thereon. ART was also a significant owner of a partnership interest in the partnership that was awarded the initial damages in the matter. ART and ART Midwest, Inc. are not and have never been subsidiaries of the Company. As a result of a final Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by the court on January 25, 2016, all claims alleged by the plaintiff against IOT have been dismissed. During the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this Report, no proceeding previously reported was terminated. ART and ART Midwest, Inc. are not and have never been subsidiaries of the Company. Management believes that the Company has no liability for any ultimate judgment proceeding involving the Clapper Parties. Liquidity Management anticipates that IOT will generate excess cash from operations in 2016 due to the interest collected from notes receivable; however, such excess may not be sufficient to discharge all of IOT’s debt obligations as they mature. Management intends to reduce its cash invested with its Advisor to meet its cash requirements not funded through operations.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2015

Commitments and contingenciestextblock

NOTE 12. COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES AND LIQUIDITY

Litigation

The Company and its subsidiaries, from time to time, have been involved in various items of litigation incidental to and in the ordinary course of its business and, in the opinion of management; the outcome of such litigation will not have a material adverse impact upon the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

In 2005, IOT purchased 10.08 acres of land, located in Dallas County, Texas, from TCI, a related party, and obtained 3^rd party financing. On August 2, 2011, the property was sold to ABCLD Real Estate, LLC ("ABCLD"), a related party. Ownership of this property was subsequently transferred from ABCLD to the lender through foreclosure procedures.

On April 27, 2012, ABCLD filed a lawsuit for wrongful foreclosure against the lender. On September 9, 2014, the court entered a final judgement declaring that the foreclosure was void as a matter of law. ABCLD subsequently paid $7 million to get the property back.

The plaintiffs appealed the final judgement and alleged that ABCLD and other various entities were responsible for deficiencies, unpaid interest and related attorney fees. With the $7 million that was applied to the outstanding loan balance, the potential loss is significantly reduced, and the amount of final damages is contingent upon the outcome of the appeal. As part of a settlement agreement, ABCLD paid an additional $2.6 million to regain ownership of the parcel. As of December 31, 2015 the Company has no further obligations related to this parcel.

ART and ART Midwest, Inc.

In August 2014, David M. Clapper and two entities related to Mr. Clapper (all, collectively, the “Clapper Parties”) filed a complaint in the U. S. District Court against the Company, its directors and certain of its officers alleging purported transactions to the detriment of the Clapper Parties and others by transferring assets, cash and diverting property. Management of the Company believes that there is no basis for this action against the Company and its officers and directors and intends to vigorously defend itself. The August 2014 complaint does not allege any facts relating to the Company, except that the named directors and officers are directors and officers of the Company and that the Company is a Nevada corporation, with its headquarters/principal place of business in Dallas, Texas.

The case arises over other litigation, commenced in 1999, among the Clapper Parties and American Realty Trust, Inc. (“ART”) and its former subsidiary, ART Midwest, Inc., originally arising out of a transaction in 1998, in which ART and the Clapper Parties were to form a partnership to own eight residential apartment complexes. Over the ensuing years, a number of rulings, both for and against ART and ART Midwest, Inc., were issued, resulting in a ruling in October 2011, under which the Clapper Parties were awarded an initial judgment for approximately $74 million, including $26 million in actual damages and $48 million in interest. The 2011 ruling was only against ART and ART Midwest, Inc., but no other entity. During February 2014, the Court of Appeals affirmed a portion of the judgment in favor of the Clapper Parties but also ruled that a double counting of a significant portion of the damages had occurred and remanded the case back to the trial court to recalculate the damage award, as well as pre- and post-judgment interest thereon. ART was also a significant owner of a partnership interest in the partnership that was awarded the initial damages in the matter. ART and ART Midwest, Inc. are not and have never been subsidiaries of the Company.

As a result of a final Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by the court on January 25, 2016, all claims alleged by the plaintiff against IOT have been dismissed. During the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this Report, no proceeding previously reported was terminated.

ART and ART Midwest, Inc. are not and have never been subsidiaries of the Company. Management believes that the Company has no liability for any ultimate judgment proceeding involving the Clapper Parties.

Liquidity

Management anticipates that IOT will generate excess cash from operations in 2016 due to the interest collected from notes receivable; however, such excess may not be sufficient to discharge all of IOT’s debt obligations as they mature. Management intends to reduce its cash invested with its Advisor to meet its cash requirements not funded through operations.