Commitments and Contingencies

12 Months Ended

Jun. 29, 2014

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments and Contingencies:

The Company is subject to various unresolved legal actions that arise in the normal course of its business. These actions typically relate to product liability (including asbestos-related liability), patent and trademark matters, and disputes with customers, suppliers, distributors and dealers, competitors and employees.

On March 19, 2010, plaintiffs filed a complaint in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Canada (Robert Foster et al. v. Sears Canada, Inc. et al., Court File No. 766-2010) against the Company and other engine and lawnmower manufacturers alleging that the horsepower labels on the products they purchased were inaccurate and that the Company conspired with other engine and lawnmower manufacturers to conceal the true horsepower of these engines. On May 3, 2010, other plaintiffs filed a similar complaint in the Montreal Superior Court in Canada (Eric Liverman, et al. v. Deere & Company, et al., Court File No. 500-06-000507-109). Both proceedings were based on various theories of Canadian law and sought unspecified damages. On June 27, 2013, the Company entered into a Canadian Lawnmower Class Action National Settlement Agreement (“Settlement”) that resolved all horsepower claims brought by all persons in Canada who purchased lawn mowers in Canada during the class period (defined as January 1, 1994 through December 31, 2012), except certain specified persons. The Settlement was approved by the Ontario Court and the Quebec Court in September 2013, and all payments required by the Company have been made. As a result of the Settlement, the Company recorded a total charge of US $1.9 million as a litigation settlement expense on the Statement of Operations in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2013.

On May 14, 2010, the Company notified retirees and certain retirement eligible employees of various amendments to the Company-sponsored retiree medical plans intended to better align the plans offered to both hourly and salaried retirees. On August 16, 2010, a putative class of retirees who retired prior to August 1, 2006 and the United Steel Workers filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (Merrill, Weber, Carpenter, et al.; United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO/CLC v. Briggs & Stratton Corporation; Group Insurance Plan of Briggs & Stratton Corporation; and Does 1 through 20, Docket No. 10-C-0700), contesting the Company's right to make these changes. The complaint seeks an injunction preventing the alleged unilateral termination or reduction in insurance coverage to the class of retirees, a permanent injunction preventing defendants from ever making changes to the retirees' insurance coverage, restitution with interest (if applicable) and attorneys' fees and costs. A class has been certified, and discovery has been concluded. Briefing on the Company’s and the retirees' summary judgment motions will occur soon. If the court denies the motions, a jury trial will be scheduled.

Although it is not possible to predict with certainty the outcome of these unresolved legal actions or the range of possible loss, the Company believes the unresolved legal actions will not have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial position or cash flows.