Commitments and Contingencies
|3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
|Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]
|Commitments and Contingencies
(5) Commitments and Contingencies
As of March 31, 2016, we had one uncompleted bonded project and the aggregate bonded amount on this project was approximately $3 million. Our bonded project is the subject of claims and disputes involving the subcontractors associated with the project. We expect this project to be completed in 2016.
We are one of the defendants in a multiple plaintiff wrongful death action in Hawaii related to a fireworks explosion that occurred in April 2011 at a facility operated by a subcontractor, that resulted in the death of five of its employees. The litigation is expected to proceed to trial in 2017. While the results of litigation cannot be predicted with certainty, we do not anticipate that this litigation will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial position.
In March 2013, a lawsuit, Anchorage v. Integrated Concepts and Research Corporation, et al., was filed in the Superior Court for the State of Alaska at Anchorage by the Municipality of Anchorage, Alaska against our wholly owned subsidiary Integrated Concepts and Research Corporation ("ICRC") and two former subcontractors of ICRC (the "Anchorage Lawsuit"). With respect to ICRC, the plaintiff asserts, among other things, breach of contract, professional negligence and negligence in respect of work and services ICRC rendered under the Port of Anchorage Intermodal Expansion Contract with the Maritime Administration, a federal agency with the United States Department of Transportation. ICRC
did not have a contract with the Municipality of Anchorage. In April 2013, ICRC removed the case to the United States District Court for the District of Alaska. ICRC's contract with the Maritime Administration expired on May 31, 2012. The litigation is expected to proceed to trial in 2017. Currently, we cannot predict whether the Anchorage Lawsuit will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial position.
On or about August 21, 2015, a lawsuit, The Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company, The Travelers Indemnity Company of Connecticut and Travelers Property Casualty Company of America v. Integrated Concepts and Research Corporation, VSE Corporation and Municipality of Anchorage, was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Alaska. The plaintiff insurance companies are seeking, among other things, (a) a declaration by the court that there is no defense or indemnity coverage available to ICRC and VSE for the Anchorage Lawsuit under the insurance policies issued by the plaintiffs and (b) reimbursement of defense fees and costs incurred by the plaintiffs in the defense of uncovered claims in respect of the Anchorage Lawsuit.
On or about February 27, 2015, a lawsuit, Heritage Disposal and Storage v. VSE Corporation, was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska. The litigation subsequently was transferred to the Eastern District of Virginia on November 9, 2015. The lawsuit asserts, among other things, breach of contract for services rendered related to the storage and manipulation of fireworks. The services relate to a prime contract that VSE maintains with the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The complaint alleges that VSE has not paid Heritage the full charge for services rendered. The litigation is expected to proceed to trial in the summer of 2016. Currently, we cannot predict whether this litigation will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial position.
In addition to the above-referenced litigations, we have, in the normal course of business, certain claims against us and against other parties and we may be subject to various governmental investigations. In our opinion, the resolution of these litigations, claims and investigations will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, cash flows or financial position. However, the results of any legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty, therefore, the amount of loss, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated.