Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Refer to the description of the Broiler Antitrust Civil Litigation, the Wage Rate Litigation and the Broiler Chicken Grower Litigation under the heading “Commitments and Contingencies” in Part II, Item 8, Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 21: Commitments and Contingencies, which discussion is incorporated herein by reference.

On June 6, 2019, our poultry rendering facility in Hanceville, Alabama, acquired from American Proteins, Inc. in 2018, experienced a release of partially treated wastewater that reached a nearby river and resulted in a fish kill. We took remediation efforts following the release to mitigate the impact. The State of Alabama filed suit against Tyson Farms, Inc. on April 29, 2020 for the June 6, 2019 release, as well as a prior release. Related civil suits have also been filed, which include individual and collective claims for compensatory and punitive damages against us and other defendants for alleged contamination of the local water supply, personal injury, property damage, diminution in property values, loss of recreational waterway use, lost non-profit revenue and business damages. Certain plaintiffs also allege that the facility’s historical and ongoing operations constitute a nuisance under Alabama law and are also seeking injunctive relief. On August 13, 2021, the court approved a settlement of all claims with the State of Alabama related to this action on terms not material to the Company. While we do not admit any liability as part of the settlement, we believe that the settlement was in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders to avoid the uncertainty, risk, expense and distraction of protracted litigation.

On December 19, 2019, a putative class of direct purchasers filed a class action against us, other turkey suppliers, and Agri Stats, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiffs allege, among other things, that the defendants entered into an agreement to exchange competitively sensitive information regarding turkey supply, production and pricing plans, all with the intent to artificially inflate the price of turkey, in violation of the Sherman Act. Plaintiffs are seeking treble damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs and attorneys’ fees on behalf of the putative class. On April 13, 2020, a similar complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf of a putative class of indirect purchasers of turkey alleging claims based on the Sherman Act and various state law causes of action. The plaintiffs are seeking treble damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs, and attorneys' fees on behalf of the putative class. Since the original filing, certain putative class members have opted out of the matter and are proceeding with individual direct actions making similar claims, and others may do so in the future. In April 2021, we reached agreement to settle all claims with the putative direct purchaser class for $4.625 million and with the putative commercial and institutional indirect purchaser class for $1.75 million. On May 25, 2021, the Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement with the putative direct purchaser class, and the final fairness hearing is scheduled for January 6, 2022. On July 26, 2021, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement with the putative commercial and institutional indirect purchaser class, and the final approval hearing is expected to be held in early 2022. While we do not admit any liability as part of the settlements, we believe that the settlements were in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders to avoid the uncertainty, risk, expense and distraction of protracted litigation.

On June 19, 2005, the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Environment of the State of Oklahoma filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma against Tyson Foods, Inc., three subsidiaries and six other poultry integrators. The complaint, which was subsequently amended, asserts a number of state and federal causes of action including, but not limited to, counts under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and state-law public nuisance theories. Oklahoma alleges that the defendants and certain contract growers who were not joined in the lawsuit polluted the surface waters, groundwater and associated drinking water supplies of the Illinois River Watershed through the land application of poultry litter. Oklahoma’s claims were narrowed through various rulings issued before and during trial and its claims for natural resource damages were dismissed by the district court in a ruling issued on July 22, 2009, which was subsequently affirmed on appeal by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. A non-jury trial of the remaining claims including Oklahoma’s request for injunctive relief began on September 24, 2009. Closing arguments were held on February 11, 2010. The district court has not yet rendered its decision from the trial.

Other Matters

As of October 2, 2021, we had approximately 137,000 team members and, at any time, have various employment practices matters outstanding. In the aggregate, these matters are important to the Company, and we devote considerable resources to managing employment issues. Additionally, we are subject to other lawsuits, investigations and claims (some of which involve substantial amounts) arising out of the conduct of our business. While the ultimate results of these matters cannot be determined, they are not expected to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations or financial position.