Note 16 COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
 
Service and License Agreements
 
The Company entered into certain service and license agreements that provide for future minimum payments. The terms of these agreements vary in length through December 31, 2030. The following table shows the remaining payment obligations under these agreements as of December 31, 2025:
 
     
   December 31, 2025  
Year ending December 31, 2026   10,360,625 
Year ending December 31, 2027   7,661,375 
Year ending December 31, 2028   5,485,875 
Year ending December 31, 2029   4,475,000 
Year ending December 31, 2030   4,750,000 
Thereafter    
   $32,732,875 
 
Commitments and contingencies includes $1,050,439 recorded in accrued expenses and other liabilities, representing information license liabilities under various licensing agreements (see “Note 3 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – Vendors and Licensors”).
 
Legal Proceedings
 
From time to time the Company may be involved in claims that arise during the ordinary course of business. For any matters where management currently believes it is probable that the Company will incur a loss and that the probable loss or range of loss can be reasonably estimated, the Company records reserves in the consolidated financial statements based on its best estimates of such loss. In other instances, because of the uncertainties related to either the probable outcome or the amount or range of loss, management is unable to make a reasonable estimate of a liability, if any. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can be costly and time consuming and it can divert management’s attention from important business matters and initiatives, negatively impacting the Company’s overall operations. Although the results of litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company does not currently have any pending or recently resolved litigation to which it is a party or to which its property is subject that the Company believes to be material, except for the below.
 
Audet v. Green Tree International, et. al.
 
On February 14, 2020, John Audet filed a complaint in 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida against multiple parties, including Green Tree International (“GTI”), an indirect subsidiary of the Company, claiming that he owned 10% of GTI. The complaint sought unspecified monetary damages equivalent to the value a 10% shareholder of GTI would have received in the subsequent Helix and Forian transactions, along with an equitable accounting and constructive trust to determine if Audet suffered any loss of profit distributions. On March 8, 2024, the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement and General Release, which included a release of GTI, the Company and its subsidiaries and all related parties. The parties filed a Joint Stipulation to Dismiss with Prejudice with respect to this matter on March 18, 2024. The Court entered a Final Order of Dismissal with Prejudice with respect to this matter on March 27, 2024.
Grant Whitus et al. v. Forian Inc., Zachary Venegas and Scott Ogur
 
On July 30, 2021, four former Helix employees filed a lawsuit in the Arapahoe County, Colorado District Court against the Company and Helix’s former managers asserting claims of breach of contract, promissory estoppel, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, civil theft and conversion, fraudulent misrepresentation, civil conspiracy and unjust enrichment / quantum meruit, all relating to the plaintiffs’ claims that they were promised equity interest in Helix or compensation that they never received. The original complaint was never served, and in November 2021, the plaintiffs filed and served an amended complaint adding a fifth plaintiff and seeking over $27.5 million in damages as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. The Company removed the matter to the United States District Court for the District of Colorado in December 2021, and both the Company and the individual defendants filed motions to dismiss on January 20, 2022. Plaintiffs subsequently amended their complaint on April 21, 2022, adding Helix TCS LLC and Helix Technologies, Inc. as defendants and advancing additional claims for breach of fiduciary duty and violation of the Colorado Wage Claims Act. On November 22, 2023, the Company entered into a Settlement Agreement and Release with the fifth plaintiff, which included a release of the Company and its subsidiaries and all related parties. That plaintiff filed a stipulation dismissing her claims on December 12, 2023. On May 31, 2024, the remaining parties entered into a Settlement Agreement and Release, which included a release of the Company and its subsidiaries and all related parties. Plaintiffs filed a Stipulation of Dismissal on June 7, 2024. The Court entered a Minute Order dismissing the case with prejudice on June 7, 2024.
 
The Company classified related legal and settlement expenses as “Litigation and related expenseswithin operating loss. Any insurance reimbursements related to the settlements are treated as gain contingencies and will be recorded when all contingencies are resolved.

Historical Timeline

Fiscal YearFiled
2025Mar 27, 2026Showing above
2024Apr 11, 2025
2022Mar 30, 2023
2021Mar 31, 2022

About Commitments Disclosures

Commitments and contingencies disclosures catalog a company's off-balance-sheet obligations and legal exposures — purchase commitments, guarantee arrangements, pending litigation, and regulatory proceedings. These items represent potential future cash outflows that may not appear as liabilities on the balance sheet until they become probable and estimable.

Key signals: litigation reserves and disclosed loss ranges quantify management's estimate of legal exposure, but unquantified "reasonably possible" losses often represent the larger risk. Watch for changes in language around pending cases — shifts from "remote" to "reasonably possible" or increases in estimated loss ranges signal deteriorating outcomes. Unconditional purchase obligations and take-or-pay contracts create fixed cost structures that reduce operational flexibility. Guarantee arrangements for subsidiaries or joint ventures can create cascading obligations. Compare the total commitment schedule against projected free cash flow to assess whether the company can meet its obligations without additional financing.