Scotts Miracle-gro Co

Regulatory Considerations — Regulatory Matters " of this Form 10-K, we are involved in several pending environmental and regulatory matters. We believe that our assessment of contingencies is reasonable and that the related accruals, in the aggregate, are adequate; however, there can be no assurance that the final resolution of these matters will not have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

On June 6, 2024, a purported shareholder filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Case No. 2:24-cv-03132) on behalf of a proposed class of purchasers of Common Shares between November 3, 2021, and August 1, 2023. On July 26, 2024, another purported shareholder filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Case No. 2:24-cv-03766) on behalf of a proposed class of purchasers of Common Shares between June 2, 2021, and August 1, 2023. The lawsuits were consolidated by the court as In re The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company Securities Litigation (Case No. 2:24-cv-03132). The amended consolidated complaint was filed on May 9, 2025 on behalf of a proposed class of purchasers of Common Shares between May 5, 2021, and August 1, 2023, and asserts claims under Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5 and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against the Company and certain of its current and former officers based on alleged misstatements about the Company’s inventories, sales and business prospects. The action seeks, among other things, unspecified monetary damages, reasonable costs and expenses and equitable/injunctive or other relief as deemed appropriate by the Court. The Company believes that the claims asserted are without merit and intends to vigorously defend the action.

Beginning in July 2024, purported shareholders filed a series of shareholder derivative lawsuits in state and federal courts in Ohio against certain of the Company’s current and former directors and officers. The lawsuits include allegations that generally mirror those asserted in the securities lawsuits described above and assert claims for breach of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement and waste of corporate assets. The federal lawsuits also assert claims under the Exchange Act. The actions seek a judgment in favor of the Company for unspecified damages, disgorgement, interest and costs and expenses, including attorneys’ and experts’ fees.

The Company has been named as a defendant in a number of cases alleging injuries that the lawsuits claim resulted from exposure to asbestos-containing products, apparently based on the Company’s historic use of vermiculite in certain of its products. In many of these cases, the complaints are not specific about the plaintiffs’ contacts with the Company or its products. The cases vary, but complaints in these cases generally seek unspecified monetary damages (actual, compensatory, consequential and punitive) from multiple defendants. The Company believes that the claims against it are without merit and is vigorously defending against them. The Company has not recorded any accruals in its consolidated financial statements as the likelihood of a loss from these cases is not probable at this time. The Company does not believe a reasonably possible loss would be material to the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. In addition, the Company does not believe the ultimate resolution of these cases will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. There can be no assurance that future developments related to pending claims or claims filed in the future, whether as a result of adverse outcomes or as a result of significant defense costs, will not have a material effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.