MoneyGram 2009 Annual Report Download - page 687

Section 4.10
Litigation and Other Proceedings
1. Western Union Company vs. MoneyGram International, Inc., United States District Court Western District of Texas, Case No. 1:07-20978. Western
Union alleges that MoneyGram infringed one of its patents, which MoneyGram contests. While Holdco does not currently believe that this claim would
reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect on Holdco, the expected result is undeterminable at this time.
2. Javier Reto vs. Travelers Express Company, Inc., MoneyGram Payment Systems Inc., Viad Corp. et al, Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County
Department, Chancery Division, Case No. 02 CH 16657. This is a purported class action alleging MoneyGram breached its contract and violated the
Illinois Consumer Fraud Act by paying out transactions in U.S. dollars rather than local currency in certain foreign countries. Class certification will
likely be decided in the first quarter of 2008. If the class is not certified, we expect the case to conclude shortly thereafter. If the class is certified, the
probable exposure is undetermined at this time. MoneyGram has summary judgment motions pending as well. While Holdco does not currently believe
that this claim would reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect on Holdco, the expected result is undeterminable at this time.
3. L.A. Murphy v. MoneyGram International, Inc. et al., District Court of Hennepin County, Minnesota, Case No. 27-CV-07-26795. On December 19,
2007, Ms. L.A. Murphy, a stockholder of Holdco, filed a purported class action suit against Holdco, and its officers and directors, alleging breach of
fiduciary duties for failing to fully investigate the Euronet offer. On January 15, 2008, Holdco received a call from the court informing it that the
plaintiff had requested a hearing for a Temporary Restraining Order, which was heard on January 18, 2008, in Hennepin County District Court. Holdco
prevailed on such motion. Holdco subsequently learned that the plaintiff made an additional motion for a Temporary Restraining Order seeking to
enjoin the Transaction and the announced management bonuses. Holdco subsequently learned that the plaintiff decided to forego the Temporary
Restraining Order hearing.
4. Berney v. MoneyGram International, Inc., MoneyGram Payment Systems, Inc., Thomas H. Lee Partners, L.P., et al, Los Angeles Superior Court
(Central), County of Los Angeles, State of California, Case No. BC384089. On January 22, 2008, Mr. Berney, a stockholder of Holdco, filed a
complaint against Holdco and certain of its officers and directors, and Thomas H. Lee Partners, L.P., alleging, among other things, preparation,
issuance, and/or dissemination of materially false and misleading information and press releases to the investing public, breach of fiduciary duties.
Mr. Berney is requesting, among other things, preliminary and/or permanent injunctive relief and damages. The expected result is undeterminable at
this time. 23