Commitments, Contingencies and Uncertainties | 7. Commitments, Contingencies and Uncertainties Department of Defense Complaints In December 2018, the United States on behalf of the United States Department of Defense filed a complaint in Intervention against the Company (and two other defendants) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York captioned United States ex rel. James Hannum v. YRC Freight, Inc.; Roadway Express, Inc.; and Yellow Transportation, Inc., Civil Action No. 08-0811(A). The complaint alleges that the Company violated the False Claims Act by overcharging the Department of Defense for freight carrier services by failing to comply with the contractual terms of freight contracts between the Department of Defense and the Company and related government procurement rules. The complaint also alleges claims for unjust enrichment and breach of contract. Under the False Claims Act, the complaint seeks treble damages, civil penalties, attorneys’ fees and costs of suit, all in unspecified amounts. The remaining common causes of action seek an undetermined amount for an alleged breach of contract or alternatively causes constituting unjust enrichment or a payment by mistake. The Company has moved to dismiss the case, and the court heard oral arguments on the motion on August 12, 2019. On July 17, 2020, the Magistrate Judge to whom the case had been referred issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the District Judge grant the Company’s motion to dismiss in part with respect to one claim and deny it in all other respects. On May 10, 2021, the District Court entered a Decision and Order adopting Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and Decision and Order. The District Court granted two stays of the case for sixty days to allow parties time to discuss a potential resolution in this action, however the stay has been lifted and the defendants filed their answer and affirmative defenses immediately thereafter. The parties continue to discuss resolution of the matter while it moves forward. Management believes the Company has meritorious defenses against the remaining counts and intends to vigorously defend this action. We are unable to estimate the possible loss, or range of possible loss, associated with these claims at this time. Class Action Securities Complaint In January 2019, a purported class action lawsuit captioned Christina Lewis v. YRC Worldwide Inc., et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-00001, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York against the Company and certain of our current and former officers. The complaint was filed on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s publicly traded securities between March 10, 2014 and December 14, 2018. The complaint generally alleged that the defendants had violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making false and misleading statements relating to the Company’s freight billing practices as alleged in the Department of Defense complaint described above. The action included claims for damages, including interest, and an award of reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees. The co-lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on June 14, 2019, and the defendants moved to dismiss it on July 15, 2019. On March 27, 2020, the court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety and entered judgment closing the case. The co-lead plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on April 27, 2020. After the appeal was fully briefed, the parties engaged in mediation and reached an agreement in principle to settle the matter for $ 2.1 million, subject to certain conditions, including execution of a definitive settlement agreement and court approval. On February 10, 2021, the Second Circuit granted the parties’ joint motion to stay the appeal and remand the case to the District Court. On April 12, 2021, the parties executed the definitive settlement documents and then presented them to the District Court. The court approved the proposed settlement and entered a final judgment on September 9, 2021. Shareholder Derivative Complaint In February 2021, two putative shareholders filed an action derivatively and on behalf of the Company naming Douglas A. Carty, Raymond J. Bromark, William R. Davidson, Matthew A. Doheny, Robert L Friedman, James E. Hoffman, Michael J. Kneeland, Patricia M. Nazemetz, James F. Winestock, Jamie G. Pierson, Darren D. Hawkins, James L. Welch and Stephanie D. Fisher individually as defendants and the Company as the nominal defendant. The case, captioned Bhandari, et al. v. Carty, et al. , Case No. 2021-0090-SG, was filed in the Court of Chancery in the State of Delaware. The complaint alleges that the Company was exposed to harm by the individual defendants’ purported conduct concerning its freight-billing practices as alleged in the Department of Defense complaint and the class action securities complaint described above. The complaint asserts that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties and were unjustly enriched as a result of their purported conduct. Claims similar to those raised in Bhandari had been raised in two shareholder derivative cases that were previously disclosed by the Company and have been dismissed. The defendants moved to dismiss the action on April 19, 2021. On July 16, 2021, the putative shareholders moved for entry of an order dismissing the Bhandari action without prejudice. On July 19, 2021, the Court entered an order dismissing the action without prejudice. Other Legal Matters We are involved in litigation or proceedings that arise in ordinary business activities. When possible, we insure against these risks to the extent we deem prudent, but no assurance can be given that the nature or amount of such insurance will be sufficient to fully indemnify us against liabilities arising out of pending and future legal proceedings. Many of these insurance policies contain self-insured retentions in amounts we deem prudent. Based on our current assessment of information available as of the date of these consolidated financial statements, we believe that our consolidated financial statements include adequate provisions for estimated costs and losses that may be incurred within the litigation and proceedings to which we are a party. |