Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

Commitments and Contingencies

v2.4.0.8
Commitments and Contingencies
6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies
Lease Commitments
In the first quarter of 2013, we entered into a capital lease agreement for software that expires in 2016. We recognize lease expense on a straight-line basis over the lease term.
The assets under capital lease are as follows:
 
June 30, 2014
 
December 31, 2013
 
(in thousands)
Software
$
1,977

 
$
1,977

Less: Accumulated depreciation and amortization
(829
)
 
(549
)
Assets under capital lease, net
$
1,148

 
$
1,428


Aggregate annual rental commitments at June 30, 2014 under capital lease are as follows:
 
 
 
(in thousands)
2014
$
294

2015
587

2016
294

Total minimum lease payments
$
1,175

Less amount representing average interest at 2.2%
(27
)
 
1,148

Less current portion
568

Long-term portion
$
580


Guarantor Arrangements
We have agreements whereby we indemnify our officers and directors for certain events or occurrences while the officer or director is or was serving at our request in such capacity. The term of the indemnification period is for the officer or director’s lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited; however, we have a director and officer insurance policy that limits our exposure and enables us to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. As a result of our insurance policy coverage, we believe the estimated fair value of these indemnification agreements is minimal. Accordingly, we had no liabilities recorded for these agreements as of June 30, 2014 or December 31, 2013.
In the ordinary course of our business, we enter into standard indemnification provisions in our agreements with our customers. Pursuant to these provisions, we indemnify our customers for losses suffered or incurred in connection with third-party claims that our products infringed upon any U.S. patent, copyright, trademark or other intellectual property right. Where applicable, we generally limit such infringement indemnities to those claims directed solely to our products and not in combination with other software or products. With respect to our products, we also generally reserve the right to resolve such claims by designing a non-infringing alternative, by obtaining a license on reasonable terms, or by terminating our relationship with the customer and refunding the customer’s fees.
The potential amount of future payments to defend lawsuits or settle indemnified claims under these indemnification provisions is unlimited in certain agreements; however, we believe the estimated fair value of these indemnification provisions is minimal, and, accordingly, we had no liabilities recorded for these agreements as of June 30, 2014 or December 31, 2013.
Litigation
From time to time, in the normal course of our business, we are a party to litigation matters and claims. Litigation can be expensive and disruptive to normal business operations. Moreover, the results of complex legal proceedings are difficult to predict and our view of these matters may change in the future as the litigation and events related thereto unfold. We expense legal fees as incurred. Insurance recoveries associated with legal costs incurred are recorded when they are deemed probable of recovery.
We review the status of each matter and record a provision for a liability when we consider both that it is probable that a liability has been incurred and that the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. These provisions are reviewed quarterly and adjusted as additional information becomes available. If either or both of the criteria are not met, we assess whether there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss, or additional losses beyond those already accrued, may be incurred. If there is a reasonable possibility that a material loss (or additional material loss in excess of any existing accrual) may be incurred, we disclose an estimate of the amount of loss or range of losses, either individually or in the aggregate, as appropriate, if such an estimate can be made, or disclose that an estimate of loss cannot be made. An unfavorable outcome in any legal matter, if material, could have an adverse effect on our operations, financial position, liquidity and results of operations.
On January 24, 2011, Yardi Systems, Inc. ("Yardi") filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against RealPage, Inc. and DC Consulting, Inc. (the “Yardi Lawsuit”). We answered and filed counterclaims against Yardi, and on July 1, 2012, the Company and Yardi entered into a settlement agreement resolving all outstanding litigation between the parties.
In connection with the Yardi Lawsuit, the Company made claims for reimbursement against each of its primary and excess layer general liability and errors and omissions liability insurance carriers. Each of our primary and excess layer errors and omissions liability insurance carriers other than Homeland Insurance of New York (“Homeland”) reimbursed the Company up to each of its policy limits. On July 19, 2012, we became aware of assertions by one of our primary layer errors and omissions insurance carriers, Ace European Group, Ltd. d/b/a Ace European Group, Barbican Syndicate 1995 at Lloyds’s (“Ace”), that Ace no longer considered the previously reimbursed $5.0 million payment covered under such policy, and that Ace demanded reimbursement of the $5.0 million payment that it had previously reimbursed to us. On August 12, 2012, our first excess layer errors and omissions insurance carrier, Axis Surplus Insurance Company (“Axis”), informed us that if Ace’s policy is deemed void, then Axis’ first excess layer policy was void on the same basis which would result in the Company’s obligation to reimburse to Axis $5.0 million in payments that Axis had previously reimbursed to us. The Company disputed these assertions by these carriers. Accordingly, on August 14, 2012, the Company filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against Ace and Axis (the “Ace Lawsuit”) seeking a declaration by the court that Ace and Axis have no right to, and no lawful reason to demand reimbursement of, the amounts paid to the Company’s counsel in connection with the Yardi Lawsuit. On February 25, 2014, RealPage and Axis entered into a confidential settlement and mutual release of claims, as a result of which Axis was dismissed from the Ace Lawsuit. On March 11, 2014, Ace filed its answer, affirmative defenses and counterclaims. On April 1, 2014, RealPage and Ace entered into a confidential settlement agreement and mutual release of claims and on April 7, 2014, the court entered an order granting the joint motion to dismiss all claims and demands asserted in the lawsuit. We expensed $4.7 million, inclusive of the settlements and other related costs in the first quarter of 2014.
We are involved in other litigation matters not listed above but we believe that any reasonably possible adverse outcome of these matters would not be material either individually or in the aggregate at this time. Our view of the matters not listed may change in the future as the litigation and events related thereto unfold.