Expedia 2005 Annual Report Download - page 32

City of Findlay, Ohio Litigation. On October 25, 2005, the city of Findlay, OH filed a purported
state wide class action in state court against a number of internet travel companies, including Hotels.com,
Hotwire and Expedia. City of Findlay v. Hotels.com, L.P., et al., No. 2005-CV-673 (Court of Common
Pleas of Hancock County, Ohio). The complaint alleges that the defendants have failed to pay to the city
hotel occupancy taxes as required by municipal ordinance. The complaint purports to assert claims for
violation of that ordinance, violation of the consumer protection act, conversion imposition of a
constructive trust and declaratory relief. The complaint seeks damages and other relief in an unspecified
amount. On November 22, 2005, defendants removed the case to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Ohio. On January 30, 2006, the defendants moved to dismiss the case.
City of Chicago Litigation. On November 1, 2005, the city of Chicago, Illinois filed an action in
state court against a number of internet travel companies, including Hotels.com, Hotwire and Expedia.
City of Chicago, Illinois v. Hotels.com, L.P., et al., No. 2005 L051003 (Circuit Court of Cook County).
The complaint alleges that the defendants have failed to pay to the city the hotel accommodations taxes as
required by municipal ordinance. The complaint purports to assert claims for violation of that ordinance,
conversion, imposition of a constructive trust and demand for a legal accounting. The complaint seeks
damages, restitution, disgorgement, fines, penalties and other relief in an unspecified amount. On
January 31, 2006, the defendants moved to dismiss the complaint.
City of Rome, Georgia Litigation. On November 18, 2005, the city of Rome, Georgia, Hart County,
Georgia, and the city of Cartersville, Georgia filed a purported state wide class action in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against a number of internet travel companies,
including Hotels.com, Hotwire and Expedia. City of Rome, Georgia, et al. v. Hotels.com, L.P., et al.,
No. 4:05-CV-249 (U.S. District Court, Northern District of Georgia, Rome Division). The complaint
alleges that the defendants have failed to pay to the county and cities the hotel accommodations taxes as
required by municipal ordinances. The complaint purports to assert claims for violation of excise and sales
and use tax ordinances, conversion, unjust enrichment, imposition of a constructive trust, declaratory relief
and injunctive relief. The complaint seeks damages and other relief in an unspecified amount. On
February 6, 2006, the defendants moved to dismiss the complaint.
Pitt County, North Carolina Litigation. On December 1, 2005, Pitt County, North Carolina filed a
purported state wide class action in state court against a number of internet travel companies, including
Hotels.com, Hotwire and Expedia. Pitt County, et al. v. Hotels.com, L.P. et al., No. 05-CVS-3017 (State
of North Carolina, Pitt County, General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division). The complaint alleges
that the defendants have failed to pay to the city hotel accommodations taxes as required by municipal
ordinance. The complaint purports to assert claims for violation of that ordinance, violation of the
deceptive trade practices act, conversion, imposition of a constructive trust and a declaratory judgment that
defendants have engaged in unlawful business practices. The complaint seeks damages and other relief in
an unspecified amount. On February 13, 2006, the defendants removed the action to the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. On March 14, 2006, the defendants filed a
motion to dismiss the complaint.
City of San Diego, California Litigation. On February 9, 2006, the city of San Diego, California
filed an action in state court against a number of internet travel companies, including Hotels.com, Hotwire
and Expedia. City of San Diego v. Hotels.com, L.P. et al., (Superior Court for the County of San Diego).
The complaint alleges that the defendants have failed to pay to the city hotel accommodations taxes as
required by municipal ordinance. The complaint purports to assert claims for violation of that ordinance,
for violation of Section 17200 of the California Business and Professions Code, conversion, imposition of a
constructive trust and declaratory judgment. The complaint seeks damages and other relief in an
unspecified amount.
The Company believes that the claims in all of these litigations relating to hotel occupancy taxes lack
merit and will continue to defend vigorously against them.
25