NOTE 7 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Operating Leases

We lease certain equipment pursuant to agreements accounted for as operating leases. Rent expense aggregated under these operating leases was as follows for the last three fiscal years:


	Year ended June 26, 2014		Year ended June 27, 2013		Year ended June 28, 2012
Rent expense related to operating leases	$	1,572	$	1,414	$	1,459

Aggregate non-cancelable lease commitments under these operating leases with initial or remaining terms greater than one year are as follows:


Fiscal year ending
June 25, 2015	$	1,320
June 30, 2016		1,187
June 29, 2017		1,038
June 28, 2018		543
June 27, 2019		141
Thereafter		17

	$	4,246

Litigation

We are currently a party to various legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business. While management presently believes that the ultimate outcomes of these proceedings, individually and in the aggregate, will not materially affect our financial position, results of operations or cash flows, legal proceedings are subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable outcomes could occur. Unfavorable outcomes could include substantial money damages in excess of any appropriate accruals which management has established. Were such unfavorable final outcomes to occur, there exists the possibility of a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

Cardenas et. al. v John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc.

In fiscal 2010, a class action wage and hour lawsuit was filed against us in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (the “District Court”) under the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (“IMWL”) and the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). The plaintiffs claimed damages under the IMWL in an amount equal to all unpaid back pay alleged to be owed to the plaintiffs, prejudgment interest on the back pay, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and an injunction precluding the Company from violating the IMWL. The plaintiffs additionally claimed damages under the FLSA in an amount equal to all back pay alleged to be owed to the plaintiffs, prejudgment interest on the back pay, liquidated damages equal to the amount of unpaid back wages, and attorneys’ fees and costs. In fiscal 2011, the plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint in which they alleged that the Company maintained and maintains a practice regarding the rounding of employees’ time entries which violates the IMWL and the FLSA.

Following mediation during fiscal 2011 in order to cover an expanded scope of wage and hour claims, plaintiffs and facilities, we agreed in principle to a $2,600 settlement (the “Settlement Agreement”). In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2011, the Settlement Agreement was finalized and preliminarily approved by the District Court which included a provision allowing for a reverter payment if all or some class members do not submit claim forms. We recorded an accrual of $1,950 in fiscal 2011 for the class action wage and hour lawsuit which was our best estimate of the payout to class members who submitted claim forms, net of any estimated reverter payout to the Company and other agreed upon payouts pursuant to the settlement agreement.

During the first quarter of fiscal 2012, the Court issued a final approval of the Settlement Agreement which did not have a material impact on earnings during fiscal 2012. The case was closed and formally dismissed by the Court during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2012. Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, we paid $2,600 to the claims administrator during the first quarter of fiscal 2012 and received a reverter payment for unclaimed settlement funds of approximately $665 during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2012.