Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

Legal Proceedings

Legal Proceedings
3 Months Ended
Dec. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Legal Proceedings
Legal Proceedings
The Sports Authority Bankruptcy Litigation
Soffe is involved in several related litigation matters stemming from The Sports Authority's ("TSA") March 2, 2016, filing of a voluntary petition(s) for relief under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the "TSA Bankruptcy"). Prior to such filing, Soffe provided TSA with products to be sold on a consignment basis pursuant to a "pay by scan" agreement and the litigation matters relate to Soffe's interest in the products it provided TSA on a consignment basis (the "Products") and the proceeds derived from the sale of such products (the "Proceeds").
TSA Stores, Inc. and related entities TSA Ponce, Inc. and TSA Caribe, Inc. filed an action against Soffe on March 16, 2016, in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "TSA Action") essentially seeking a declaratory judgment that: (i) Soffe does not own the Products but rather has a security interest that is not perfected or senior and is avoidable; (ii) Soffe only has an unsecured claim against TSA; (iii) TSA and TSA's secured creditors have valid, unavoidable and senior rights in the Products and the Products are the property of TSA’s estate; (iv) Soffe does not have a perfected purchase money security interest in the Products; (v) Soffe is not entitled to a return of the Products; and (vi) TSA can continue to sell the Products and Soffe is not entitled to any proceeds from such sales other than as an unsecured creditor. The TSA Action also contains claims seeking to avoid Soffe's filing of a financing statement related to the Products as a preference and recover the value of that transfer as well as to disallow Soffe's claims until it has returned preferential transfers or their associated value. TSA also brings a claim for a permanent injunction barring Soffe from taking certain actions. We believe that many of the claims in the TSA Action, including TSA’s claim for injunction, are now moot as a result of Soffe’s agreement to permit TSA to continue selling the Products in TSA’s going-out-of-business sale.
On May 16, 2016, TSA lender Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Successor Administrative and Collateral Agent ("WSFS"), intervened in the TSA Action seeking a declaratory judgment that: (i) WSFS has a perfected interest in the Products and Proceeds that is senior to Soffe's interest; and (ii) the Proceeds paid to Soffe must be disgorged pursuant to an order previously issued by the court. WSFS's intervening complaint also contains a separate claim seeking the disgorgement of all Proceeds paid to Soffe along with accrued and unpaid interest.
Soffe has asserted counterclaims against WSFS in the TSA Action essentially seeking a declaratory judgment that: (i) WSFS is not perfected in the Products; and (ii) WSFS's interest in the Products is subordinate to Soffe's interest.
On May 24, 2016, Soffe joined an appeal filed by a number of TSA consignment vendors in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware challenging an order issued in the TSA Bankruptcy that, should WSFS or TSA succeed in the TSA Action, granted TSA and/or WSFS a lien on all Proceeds received by Soffe and requiring the automatic disgorgement of such Proceeds. Soffe and another entity are the remaining consignment vendors pursuing this appeal.
Although we will continue to vigorously defend against the TSA Action and pursue the above-referenced counterclaims and appeal, should TSA and/or WSFS ultimately prevail on their claims, we could be forced to disgorge all Proceeds received and forfeit our ownership rights in any Products that remain in TSA's possession. We believe the range of possible loss in this matter is currently $0 to $3.3 million; however, it is too early to determine the probable outcome and, therefore, no amount has been accrued related to this matter.
In addition, at times we are party to various legal claims, actions and complaints. We believe that, as a result of legal defenses, insurance arrangements, and indemnification provisions with parties believed to be financially capable, such actions should not have a material effect on our operations, financial condition, or liquidity.