Commitments and Contingencies | NOTE 6 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Putative class action complaints were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas – Dallas Division against Pier 1 Imports, Inc., Alexander W. Smith and Charles H. Turner in August and October 2015 alleging violations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The lawsuits, which have been consolidated into a single action captioned Town of Davie Police Pension Plan, Plaintiff, v. Pier 1 Imports, Inc., Alexander W. Smith and Charles H. Turner, Defendants, were filed on behalf of a purported putative class of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired stock of Pier 1 Imports, Inc. between April 10, 2014 and December 17, 2015. The plaintiffs seek to recover damages purportedly caused by the Defendants’ alleged violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 The Company announced in January 2016 a voluntary recall of its Swingasan Chair and Stand in cooperation with the CPSC. In September 2016, the Company received a staff investigatory letter from the CPSC indicating that the CPSC would investigate whether the Company complied with certain reporting requirements of the Consumer Product Safety Act with respect to the recall. The Company responded to the inquiry and cooperated with the CPSC. On September 20, 2017, the Company received a letter from the CPSC proposing to resolve certain alleged violations of the Consumer Product Safety Act relating to the Swingasan recall on terms which would require, among other things, the payment of a civil money penalty. On October 27, 2017, the Company submitted its response to the CPSC letter. The Company disagrees with a number of the allegations and legal conclusions asserted by the CPSC and believes the requested civil money penalty is excessive in view of the circumstances. Given the nature of this matter and the uncertainty as to how and when it will be resolved, the Company believes that a reasonable estimate of the potential range of loss in connection with this matter is $2,000,000 to $6,200,000. While we anticipate that the final settlement will fall within the estimated range of outcomes, the final terms of the resolution of this matter cannot be predicted with certainty and no assurances can be given as to the specific amount that the Company may be required to pay. The Company is a defendant in lawsuits pending in federal courts in California containing various class action allegations under California state wage-and-hour The Company recognized expense of $6,600,000 in the second quarter of fiscal 2018 attributable to the legal and regulatory proceedings described in the two preceding paragraphs as a component of selling, general and administrative expenses. There are various other claims, lawsuits, inquiries, investigations and pending actions against the Company incident to the operations of its business. The Company considers these other matters to be ordinary and routine in nature. The Company maintains insurance against the consolidated class action described in the first paragraph in this Note and liability insurance against most of the other matters noted in this paragraph. It is the opinion of management, after consultation with counsel, that the ultimate resolution of such matters will not have a material adverse effect, either individually or in the aggregate, on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. |