Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies The Company is regularly involved in litigation, both as a plaintiff and as a defendant, relating to its business and operations. The Company assesses the likelihood of any judgments or outcomes with respect to these matters and determines loss contingency assessments on a gross basis after assessing the probability of incurrence of a loss and whether a loss is reasonably estimable. In addition, the Company considers other relevant factors that could impact its ability to reasonably estimate a loss. A determination of the amount of reserves required, if any, for these contingencies is made after analyzing each matter. The Company’s reserves may change in the future due to new developments or changes in strategy in handling these matters. Although the results of litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company currently believes that the final outcome of the matters listed below will not have a material adverse effect on its business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can adversely impact the Company as a result of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors. Moore, et al. v. Angie's List, Inc., 2:15cv-01243-SD . On March 11, 2015, a lawsuit seeking class action status was filed against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The lawsuit alleges claims for breaches of contract and the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, fraud and fraudulent inducement, unjust enrichment and violation of Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law premised on the allegations that the Company does not disclose that it accepts advertising payments from service providers or that the payments allegedly will impact the service provider letter-grade ratings, the content and availability of reviews about the provider and the provider's place in search-result rankings. The Company filed a motion to dismiss on May 13, 2015, which was granted in part on August 7, 2015. In particular, the plaintiff's claims for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and unjust enrichment were dismissed from the action. The parties proceeded to exchange extensive written and document discovery and conducted depositions. Discovery closed on April 14, 2016. During the discovery period, certain other cases with similar allegations also were filed by some of the same plaintiffs’ counsel in federal court in California ( Zygelman v. Angie's List, Inc., 3:16-cv-00276-SI ) and New Jersey ( Glick v. Angie's List, Inc., 2:16-cv-00546-MCA-MAH ), each discussed below. Following mediation sessions held on April 4, 2016 and April 12, 2016, the parties executed a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) on April 19, 2016 to settle the claims on a class-wide basis. Among other relief, the settlement provides for a cash payment of up to $2,350 to create a fund for the payment of cash to settlement class members and for the payment of attorneys’ fees and costs to plaintiffs’ counsel as approved by the court. Settlement class members will have the option of sharing in the cash fund or selecting a free period of membership of up to four months depending on the date and length of their membership with Angie’s List. The settlement also provides certain prospective relief in the form of enhanced explanations in the Company's Membership Agreement and in responses to Frequently Asked Questions concerning, among other things, the advertising revenue earned from service providers. In accordance with U.S. GAAP, the Company recorded a $3,500 contingent liability related to this matter in the first quarter of 2016, and this amount includes the cost of the cash fund described above as well as the payment of reasonable notice and administration costs, attorneys’ fees and an assumption of revenue the Company will forego as a result of certain class members selecting the option for a free period of membership. As part of the settlement, plaintiffs' counsel filed, and the Company did not oppose, a motion to amend the complaint in the Moore matter to add both the Zygelman and Glick plaintiffs as named plaintiffs for settlement purposes only, as well as a motion for preliminary approval of a class-wide settlement. By order dated July 11, 2016, the court granted the motion to amend the complaint, and the conditional amended class action complaint was filed as of that date. On July 12, 2016, the court entered an order granting the unopposed motion for preliminary approval of the proposed class action settlement, which, among other things, ordered that notice of the settlement be provided to the settlement class and scheduled a fairness hearing for November 8, 2016. The proposed settlement remains subject to final court approval. Glick v. Angie's List, Inc., 2:16-cv-00546-MCA-MAH . On February 1, 2016, Gary Glick, an Angie's List member, filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The plaintiff alleged that the Company deceives its consumers by representing that service providers “can't pay” or “don't pay” to be on Angie's List, while concealing that service providers pay advertising fees to influence their search result ranking, and further asserts other claims substantially similar to those alleged in the Moore litigation. The plaintiff's complaint includes claims for breach of contract and for a violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. The Glick action was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice on July 13, 2016, in accordance with the aforementioned class action settlement. Zygelman v. Angie's List, Inc., 3:16-cv-00276-SI . On January 15, 2016, Michelle Zygelman, an Angie's List member, filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiff alleged claims substantially similar to those in the Glick action but is seeking relief under California consumer protection statutes. The Zygelman action was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice on July 14, 2016, in accordance with the aforementioned class action settlement. Williams, et al. v. Angie’s List, Inc., 1:16-cv-878 . On April 20, 2016, a group of former employees filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. The lawsuit alleges that the Company failed to pay (i) wages earned in a timely manner as required under Indiana Wage Statutes and (ii) overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. §§ 206-07) and is requesting payment of all damages, including unpaid wages, interest, attorneys’ fees and other charges. A first and second amended complaint was filed, adding additional named plaintiffs, and the Company’s answer to the second amended complaint was filed on July 26, 2016. The plaintiffs filed a motion for conditional certification on June 10, 2016, and the Company filed its response brief in opposition to motion for conditional certification on July 15, 2016. The Company is currently unable to determine the likely outcome or reasonably estimate the amount or range of potential liability, if any, related to this matter, and accordingly, has not established any reserve for this matter. Crabtree, et al. v. Angie’s List, Inc., 1:16-cv-877 . On April 20, 2016, three former employees filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. The lawsuit alleges that the Company failed to pay (i) wages earned in a timely manner as required under Indiana Wage Statutes and (ii) overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. §§ 206-07) and is requesting payment of all damages, including unpaid wages, interest, attorneys’ fees and other charges. The plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint in May 2016, adding one additional Indiana wage statute claim. The Company filed its answer and defenses on June 9, 2016. The Company is currently unable to determine the likely outcome or reasonably estimate the amount or range of potential liability, if any, related to this matter, and accordingly, has not established any reserve for this matter. |