COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
|6 Months Ended|
Jun. 30, 2020
|Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]|
|COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES||
NOTE 11. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Concentration of risk. We are exposed to risks associated with clients who represent a significant portion of total revenues. For the six months ended June 30, 2020 and 2019, respectively, we had the following client revenue concentration:
Legal proceedings. In the ordinary course of conducting our business, we are, from time to time, involved in various legal proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory government investigations and other matters, including those in which we are a plaintiff or defendant, that are complex in nature and have outcomes that are difficult to predict.
As discussed in Note 1, we redeemed the shares of our common stock held by Triangulum, an entity controlled by Robert B. Saucier, Galaxy Gaming's founder, and, prior to the redemption, the holder of a majority of our outstanding common stock. On May 6, 2019, we filed a lawsuit seeking (i) a declaratory judgment that we acted lawfully and in full compliance with the Articles when we redeemed the Triangulum shares and (ii) certain remedies for breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract by Triangulum and its Managing Member, Mr. Saucier (the “Triangulum Lawsuit”). The suit alleges that the redemption and the other relief sought by us are appropriate and in accordance with the Articles.
The defendants to that lawsuit responded to the complaint, and Triangulum filed counterclaims. Triangulum also filed a Motion seeking the redeemed shares be held in a constructive trust. On July 11, 2019, the Court denied Triangulum’s Motion. On September 6, 2019, Triangulum appealed the denial of the Motion to the Nevada Supreme Court. We submitted our brief in opposition, and Triangulum filed its reply brief on June 17, 2020. Separately, Triangulum filed amended counterclaims, which we moved to dismiss on a number of legal grounds. The Court denied the motion. The Company filed a writ petition challenging the ruling, which the Supreme Court denied on January 23, 2020.
On October 18, 2019, Saucier also filed counterclaims, including a claim of breach of contract alleging Galaxy Gaming was obligated to pay Saucier his year-end bonuses, despite his resignation. We filed an answer disputing these claims.
As a result of the effects of Coronavirus, the Court issued a revised Scheduling Order extending time frames for discovery and setting a new trial date in April of 2021.
On May 6, 2020, Saucier made a demand of the Company under our Bylaws and an Indemnity Agreement between Saucier and the Company, for indemnity and advancement of funds seeking repayment of his lawyer’s fees and expenses he allegedly incurred in connection with the Company’s claims against him in the Triangulum Lawsuit. An independent counsel, selected per the terms of the Indemnification Agreement, concluded that Saucier was entitled to a small amount of indemnity funds related to the time he was employed by the Company, but denied an entitlement to indemnification thereafter.
On May 19, 2020, Saucier commenced a separate action in Nevada district court, by filing a complaint he verified as true, seeking advancement of indemnification fees to which he claims an entitlement under the Bylaws and an Indemnification Agreement The Company filed its opposition on June 4, 2020. Saucier’s Motion was denied in a hearing that occurred on June 24, 2020. Saucier filed a notice of his appeal of the decision to the Nevada Supreme Court on August 10, 2020.
We are in the discovery phase of the Triangulum Lawsuit, with discovery set to close on December 31, 2020.
In September 2018, we were served with a complaint by TableMax Corporation (“TMAX”) regarding the TMAX Agreement. We filed an answer denying the allegations and filed a partial motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims. The suit was dismissed, subject to the right of the plaintiff to file an amended complaint on or before March 20, 2019. The plaintiff did not file an amended complaint within the time period set by the Judge. After that time, the Company considered the matter closed. TMAX filed a Motion for Leave to Amend their Complaint, which was granted by the Judge on May 11, 2020. On May 26, 2020 TMAX filed an Amended Complaint against the Company and other Co-Defendants. The Company will respond to the Amended Complaint denying the allegations.
An unexpected adverse judgment in any pending litigation could cause a material impact on our business operations, intellectual property, results of operations or financial position. Unless otherwise expressly stated, we believe costs associated with litigation will not have a material impact on our financial position or liquidity but may be material to the results of operations in any given period and accordingly, no provision for loss has been reflected in the accompanying financial statements related to these matters.
The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.
Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef