Briggs & Stratton Corporation, a manufacturer of small engines operating in the Milwaukee area for the last 87 years, filed this libel suit against a weekly newspaper called the National Catholic Reporter. The newspaper published articles on possible layoffs at the company that included references to the morality of the executives making the decision and quotes that allegedly suggested that the company would be responsible for increased crime and divorce and the exploitation of female Mexican workers who might be used in new facilities. Attached to the complaint is a letter to the editor in response to the original article written by Briggs & Stratton management.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

BRIGGS & STRATTON CORPORATION,
JOHN SHIELY, GEORGE THOMPSON, III,
and THOMAS KRUKOWSKI,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

NATIONAL CATHOLIC REPORTER
PUBLISHING COMPANY, THOMAS C. FOX,
LESLIE WIRPSA, and CHRIS CURRY,

Defendants.

Civil Action 96-C-0641

Case No.


COMPLAINT

NOW COME the plaintiffs, Briggs & Stratton Corporation, John
Shiely, George Thompson, III, and Thomas Krukowski, by their
attorney, Robert E. Sutton, S.C., and for a complaint against the
defendants show to the Court as follows:

1. The plaintiff, Briggs & Stratton Corporation, is a Wisconsin
corporation and at all times material herein was involved in the
manufacturing business with offices located at 12301 West Wirth
Street, Wauwatosa, 53222 and was a citizen of the State of
Wisconsin.

2. The plaintiff, John Shiely, is an adult and at all times material was
employed as an officer by Briggs & Stratton Corporation and
maintained offices at 12301 West Wirth Street, Wauwatosa,
Wisconsin 53222 and was a citizen of the State of Wisconsin.

3. The plaintiff, George Thompson, III, is an adult and at all times
material was employed by Briggs & Stratton Corporation and
maintained offices at 12301 West Wirth Street, Wauwatosa,
Wisconsin 53222 and was a citizen of the State of Wisconsin.

4. The plaintiff, Thomas Krukowski, is an adult and at all times
material was an attorney and maintained offices at 7111 West
Edgerton Avenue, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53220 and was a citizen of
the State of Wisconsin.

5. The defendant, National Catholic Reporter Publishing Company,
is a corporation with offices located at 115 East Armour Boulevard,
Kansas City, Missouri 64111 and was a citizen of the State of
Missouri and at all times material herein published a newspaper
entitled National Catholic Reporter NCR - The Independent Catholic
Newsweekly which is distributed throughout the United States and in
foreign countries.

6. The defendant, Thomas C. Fox, is an adult and at all times
material herein was the Editor and Associate Publisher of the
National Catholic Reporter and maintained offices at 115 East
Armour Boulevard, Kansas City, Missouri 64111 and was a citizen
of the State of Missouri.

7. The defendant, Leslie Wirpsa, is an adult and at all times material
herein was the Latin American Editor, Staff Writer for the National
Catholic Reporter and maintained offices at 115 East Armour
Boulevard, Kansas City, Missouri 64111 and was a citizen of the
State of Missouri.

8. The defendant, Chris Curry, is an adult and at all times material
herein was employed as a reporter and graphic artist with the
National Catholic Reporter and maintained offices at 115 East
Armour Boulevard, Kansas City, Missouri 64111 and was a citizen
of the State of Missouri.

9. In the December 2, 1994 edition of the National Catholic Reporter
the defendants caused to be published a cover page captioned
ADIOS, AMERICAN DREAM, an editorial captioned Inside NCR,
and an article captioned "Briggs & Stratton layoffs tear family hopes
Profit-boosting action includes move to Mexico." A copy of the
cover page, editorial, and article are attached hereto and made a part
hereof marked Exhibit 1. The editorial signed by Tom Fox captioned
Inside NCR contained false and defamatory statements concerning
the plaintiffs, Briggs & Stratton Corporation, John Shiely, George
Thompson, III, and Thomas Krukowski, as follows:


Paragraph 1

"This week's cover story shows with stunning clarity how corporate
decisions hurt ordinary people and what they reveal about
decisionmakers who live in either denial or moral blindness."

Paragraph 3

"What makes this week's story on Briggs & Stratton particularly
painful is that among the decisionmakers involved - among those
seemingly blind to the consequence of their choices - are Catholics
educated in Catholic institutions."

Paragraphs 4, 5, 6, and 7

The defendant, Thomas C. Fox, goes on to enumerate six moral
principles outlined in the U.S. bishops 1986 pastoral letter on
Catholic social teachings and the United States economy directly and
falsely accusing the plaintiff of violation of those six moral
principles.


10. The article entitled Briggs & Stratton layoffs tear family hopes
contains false and defamatory statements concerning the plaintiffs,
Briggs & Stratton Corporation, John Shiely, George Thompson, III,
and Thomas Krukowski, as follows:


Paragraph 8 - first page of the article

"Repeated pleas from community and church leaders have gone
unheeded - Briggs announced in May that it will go ahead with plans
to move 2,000 more jobs out of Milwaukee. According to union
officials, the company has 'illegally' expanded its Mexico plant...."

Paragraph 10 - last page of the article allegedly quoting Bruce
Colburn, the Secretary-Treasurer of the Milwaukee County Labor
Council:

"The model of competition will become the maquiladora factories
(along the Mexican border), where there are no laws, no
environmental standards, no regulation of child labor, Colburn said."

Paragraph 12 -last page of the article quoting union leader Pepe
Oulahan:

"Once you get over the anger about how exploited the workers are
down there...the conditions are terrible. People come home from the
Honeywell and Briggs and Stratton plants to cardboard homes. Their
kids have no shoes. Their bosses exploit them. It's disgraceful to see
U.S. companies doing this. They tote a propaganda line that is good
for Mexico, but there is no way to justify that kind of suffering."

Paragraph 13 - last page of the article quoting Vicki Black, a Briggs
& Stratton worker:

"We are told they hire women there because it's said (the women) are
not rebellious and are submissive...They have done research into this
to find ways to screw people. Knowing that makes you very mad."

Paragraph 4 - first page of the article:

"In the late 1980s, the O'Halloran's dream began to turn into a
nightmare of anxiety. Motivated by a new profit-charged
management strategy and the advent of free trade, Briggs & Stratton
began to accelerate layoffs at its four Milwaukee plants. The
company started to move jobs from Milwaukee to lower-wage,
higher-profit locations like Poplar Bluff, Mo., and Juarez, Mexico."

Paragraph 25 - second page of the article again quoting Bruce
Colburn:

"The basis of our social and moral problems is not having family-
supported jobs, Colburn said. 'This impacts huge sectors of society,
and the impact is concentrated on minorities and women."'

Paragraph 1 - last page of the article falsely attributing to Briggs
Stratton:

"Against the backdrop of the city's overall 8.9 percent
unemployment, Milwaukee now lays claim to one of the worst wage
gulfs between blacks and whites nationwide."

Paragraphs 15 and 16 - first page of the article:

"CATHOLIC ETHICS?

Briggs worker and union activist Bill Lange said he thinks it is
contradictory that many of the executives at Briggs are prominent
Milwaukee Catholics who, he believes, have strayed from the social
teachings of the church. He says their management strategies
disregard tenets outlined, for example in the U.S. bishops' economic
pastoral, a document developed under the leadership of Milwaukee
Archbishop Rembert Weakland.

Weakland declined to speak to NCR regarding the Briggs & Stratton
issues, but he referred a reporter to other diocesan personnel and to
Jack Murtog, director of the Milwaukee Interfaith Alliance.

A spokesperson at Briggs and Stratton confirmed that the company's
president, John Shiely, is a Catholic and a graduate of Marquette
University High School, Notre Dame University and Marquette
University Law School.

Marquette is the alma mater of other top players in the controversy,
including George Thompson, III, director of public relations and
Tom Krukowski, a lawyer hired by the firm to help negotiate a
settlement....

The choice of Mr. Krukowski is then derided 'as a sick joke' and he
is called "a man long denominated as a union-buster."

Paragraph 6 - first page of the article:

"...The union, United Paperworkers Local 7232, eventually agreed
to such concessions as a four-year wage freeze, loss of annual
$1,200 profit-sharing payments,...and more."


11. The graphic at the end of the article prepared by the defendants,
Chris Curry and Leslie Wirpsa, is false and defamatory in that it
asserts that "Briggs & Stratton is discriminating against women,
minorities, older workers" and is contemplating elimination of the
"remaining jobs of its 5,435 Wisconsin workers and is opting to
leave the Milwaukee area" and will thereby cause "more crime, more
divorces. People are going to lose what they have."

12. The December 2, 1995 publication was distributed throughout
the United States including Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

13. On January 9, 1995 the plaintiffs, George Thompson, III and
John Shiely, forwarded a letter "To the Editor of the National
Catholic Reporter", a copy of which is attached hereto and made a
part hereof marked Exhibit 2 and requested then and have continued
to request since that the letter be published by the National Catholic
Reporter to present the plaintiffs' rebuttal to the false and defamatory
statements in the December 2, 1995 editorial and article. The
defendants refused.

14. On February 13, 1996 a demand for correction of the libelous
matter was forwarded to the defendants and a copy of that letter is
attached hereto and made a part hereof marked Exhibit 3. The
defendants have not published a correction.

15. At least one other person who has no affiliation or connection
with the plaintiffs of any kind has written the defendants advising
them of the false statements and requesting correction thereof

16. The false and defamatory statements set forth in Paragraph 12
above were intentionally published by the defendants with
knowledge of the falsity or a reckless disregard for the truth.

17. The publication of the editorial and the article by the defendants
and the refusal to publish the plaintiffs' rebuttal of the article or a
correction of the libelous statements has caused the plaintiffs and
their families to be subjected to ridicule and loss of reputation and
esteem within the community.


FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

18. Publication of the statements constitute defamation of the
plaintiffs by the defendants.


SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

19. The publication and publicity given to the religious affiliation of
the plaintiffs, John Shiely, George Thompson, III, and Thomas
Krukowski, constitute invasion of their right to privacy as set forth in
Section 895.50(2)(c), Wis. Stats.

WHEREFORE, plaintiffs demand judgment against the defendants as
follows:

(1) Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined but not
less than Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00).

(2) Punitive damages in an amount to be determined but not less than
Twenty Million Dollars ($20,000,000.00).

(3) A reasonable amount for attorney's fees pursuant to Section
895.50(1)(c), Wis. Stats.

(4) Costs, disbursements, and whatsoever relief is appropriate.


PLAINTIFFS HEREBY DEMAND TRIAL BY JURY.


Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 14h day of May, 1996.

/s/
Robert E. Sutton
Attorney for Plaintiffs

2631 N. Downer Avenue
Milwaukee, WI 53211
(414) 961-0802



==============================================
==============

BRIGGS & STRATTON CORPORATION

To the Editor of the National Catholic Reporter:

When we were contacted by a representative of the National Catholic
Reporter relative to a story on Briggs & Stratton, the following notes
were taken by George Thompson, our Director of Corporate
Communications and Community Relations: "Slanted story to be
written... part of corporate campaign... very rude over the phone...
will expect the worst." We refused to participate in our own
lynching. Our assessment was correct. The resulting story is without
question the most mean spirited and inaccurate account we have seen
to date. We are shocked that a periodical which includes the word
"Catholic" in its masthead could engage in such libelous attacks on
our company and management, and exhibit such a fundamental lack
of fairness. But we feel we are in good company. In an earlier issue,
NCR published an allegation that the Vatican was guilty of heresy.

Your readers should understand that the radical elements who
assumed leadership of our union local in 1983 have been conducting
a concerted negative "corporate campaign", the purpose of which is
to insult and harass the company and its management. Unfortunately,
some media sources like NCR are predisposed to support this
campaign.

One of the more disingenuous aspects of the NCR article is that the
interviewed individuals you identify simply as "workers" are in fact
mostly union officials and activists connected with the radical
element. For example, Mr. O'Halloran identified as a "blue-collar
worker" is the alternative grievance representative in our castings
division. Ms. Black identified as a "Briggs & Stratton worker" is a
union trustee. Both have identified themselves with the radical
element which is attempting to sustain the corporate campaign. Why
wouldn't NCR be interested in interviewing some "real" employees?

Let us give you a sampling of the misrepresentations and half truths
that are being perpetuated by the radical element of the union and
media sources who are predisposed to believe these things:


1. Allegation: "The union, United Paperworkers Local 7232,
eventually agreed to such concessions as...loss of annual $1,200
profit sharing payments."

Fact: The union agreed to drop the $1,200 guaranteed profit sharing
payment, which was not based on profits at all. However, due to our
financial success, actual profit sharing payments to our union
employees in 1994 totaled $20.6 million, for an average of $3,852
per employee- over three times the old guarantee! True performance
based compensation works.

2. Allegation: Ellen Bravo, as executive director of 9 to 5, National
Association of Working Women, apparently in support of union
officials who have made similar charges stated: "Since women and
people of color were hired only late in the game at Briggs, they bear a
disproportionate share of the job losses." The union has advanced the
argument that this is a civil rights issue.

Fact: Our union workforce is currently composed 42.5% of women
and 17.7% of minorities. We asked our human resource department
to calculate those percentages, assuming that the 2,000 least senior
employees are taken out (the anticipated number of jobs to be lost).
In fact, the percentages of women and minorities rises to 46.4% and
18.0%, respectively. Briggs & Stratton has a long history of
inclusive hiring practices in its factories.

3. Allegation: The Milwaukee Journal reported on November 25,
1993 that "The union says that workers here have fallen behind,
having received only two wage increases between 1983 and 1993,
each totaling only 2%." This statement is apparently intended to
invite the conclusion that these employees are underpaid and that their
pay rose only minimally in that period.

Fact: We had our accounting department perform a compensation
calculation of our union employees for that 10 year period. While
contractual general wage increases totaled 4%, actual W-2
compensation for that period rose 30.9% due to a number of factors
including profit sharing and increases attributed to increased
seniority. Average annual pay for our union workers is very good. In
1993, average annual pay was $36,600 which is 23% higher than the
average annual pay for manufacturing workers in Wisconsin, 59%
higher than the average annual pay for all Wisconsin workers and
41% higher than the national average annual pay for all workers.


These are only a few examples of the kinds of distortions and
misrepresentations that are being advanced as part of the corporate
campaign.

So what is really happening here? We will try to give your readers
some insights on how this developed chronologically.

On July 8, 1993, a letter was sent to the union president inviting him
to begin mutual gains bargaining with us under the supervision of the
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, with the goal of
achieving a new progressive labor agreement by the end of 1993.

On August 20, 1993, we announced that we would be assigning
employees to new "focus factory," departments. The focus factory
initiative was a commitment by the Company to invest $20 million in
order to accomplish productivity and cost improvements to help make
our Milwaukee operations more competitive and attempt to save
Milwaukee jobs.

The union leadership objected to the focus factory departmental
classifications and conducted an illegal slowdown which caused a
multimillion dollar loss to the corporation and significant loss of
wages to their own union members. On November 5, 1993, U.S.
Federal District Court Judge Thomas J. Curran issued an injunction
against the union local. On November 8, 1993, three employees,
including a union official, were discharged for their role in the illegal
slowdown.

On October 25, 1993, we outlined the economic considerations for
potential facilities relocations outside of Milwaukee, and again invited
union leadership to address the issue through a mutual gains process.

At a meeting on November 14, 1994, union leadership convinced the
membership that the union should reject any "early talks" with the
Company.

On November 23, the Business Improvement Teams in our small
engine division were suspended due to intimidation of participants by
union leadership.

On December 13, 1993, we addressed the issue of the developing
corporate campaign with our employees.

On March 29, 1994, arbitrator Robert J. Mueller ruled that the
Company had the right to change departmental classifications to
support the focus factories. This was the issue that precipitated the
illegal slowdown: "The evidence persuades the arbitrator that the
change itself to focus factories was clearly based on legitimate
business considerations. It clearly served to reduce the costly
inventory of parts by going to a "just in time" manufacturing system.
The change in manufacturing procedure is clearly justified".

On May 17, 1994, we announced the establishment of new facilities
outside of Milwaukee, which would affect approximately 2,000
Milwaukee area workers, beginning in mid-1995.

You will note that there are a few rather critical developments here of
which either the union leadership failed to inform NCR, or NCR
intentionally neglected to print.

You should also understand that while we are currently profitable,
we lost $20 million in 1989. We face intense domestic and foreign
competition and the "mass marketization" of our product by discount
retailers. The price of our Classic lawnmower engine went up by
only 3% from 1982 to 1992, while the CPI went up 43%. The
prospect of unproductive and uncompetitive Milwaukee operations is
a significant threat to the viability of this enterprise.

Let me address the ethical issues raised by these developments. Our
basic management philosophy at Briggs & Stratton is an other-
directed approach we call "Managing for Value Creation." The thesis
which supports our philosophy is that our capital providers have a
legitimate demand for a cost of capital return. That can be achieved
only through superior value creation. And real value creation requires
an integrative process of engaging our four non-capital providing
corporate constituencies (employees, customers, suppliers and
community) in mutually enabling relationships toward the end of
creating value.

We are persuaded by the model for ethical business practice called the
"covenental ethic", developed by Laura Nash, senior research
associate at Boston University's Institute for the Study of Economic
Culture and adjunct associate professor at the Boston University
Graduate School of Management. Ms. Nash espouses the view that
capitalism is at heart a voluntary social contract between the public
and business to fulfill certain mutually beneficial obligations. The
covenental ethic holds that "The chief goal of business is the creation
and deliverance of value to a voluntary or democratically controlled
marketplace. Concomitantly, it is the obligation of the marketplace
(via buyers and the law) to see to it that business receives a fair return
for such provision of value. The model discards the inconsistent
notion that no matter how valued a business decision might be it
cannot be considered ethical as long as profit is made." The
covenental ethic has four attributes:

Purpose:  Create Delivered Value

Contract:  Receive a Beneficial Return in Exchange

Driving Assumption:  Service to Others

Primary Means:  The Creation of Mutually Enabling Relationships

Any ethical model must be supported by norms and the values that
underpin those norms. The values supporting the covenental
business ethic, called the "hallmarks of business integrity" are:

Honesty:  Accuracy in assessing and representing the business and
any activity relevant to a business

Reliability:  Being consistent in action with one's purported values

Fairness:  Balancing the rights of various constituencies with
consistency and goodwill

Pragmatism:  Making concrete contributions to the ongoing financial
and organizational health of the business

I would submit that we have been consistent with these values in our
handling of the facilities relocation matter. We informed our
employees of relevant economic considerations and their need to be
part of the decision making process months before the decision.
Union leadership convinced them to reject our invitation. We
announced the relocations more than a year before significant job
losses would occur in order to allow them time to prepare. We
offered significant outplacement, retraining, severance pay and
pension supplement arrangements. We have said what we meant and
done what we said. Our focus on mutually enabling relationships
with our corporate constituencies supports consistency and goodwill
in those relationships. And we have disclosed and addressed the
pragmatic aspects of the threat of global competition and mass
marketization of our product to the ongoing financial and
organizational health of the business.

We believe these actions were also entirely consistent with the
approach recommended in the National Conference of Catholic
Bishop's Pastoral Letter Economic Justice For All. Paragraph 303
provides that when companies are considering plant closures or the
movement of capital: "As a minimum, workers have a right to be
informed in advance when such decisions are under consideration, a
right to negotiate with management about possible alternatives, and a
right to fair compensation and assistance with retraining and
relocation expenses should these be necessary." But this should not
be surprising. Good ethics is inevitably good business.

We do not believe that any ethical or moral construct (including the
Bishop's Pastoral Letter) requires that Briggs & Stratton resign itself
to the scrap heap of failed American corporations. Is there economic
justice in the demise of Allis-Chalmers (another historically large
Milwaukee employer) and its inability to pay promised pensions to its
retirees?

Managing for value creation strongly supports value-creating
partnerships with workers where they can be found. We have very
high value partnerships with our employees in Murray, Kentucky
and Poplar Bluff, Missouri. To date the Milwaukee union leadership
has actively sought to oppose such partnerships. And yet they engage
in a kind of"moral imperialism" in their challenges to our business
ethics.

At Briggs & Stratton, we have been working hard to promote the
sense of self-esteem, achievement, growth and confidence that flows
from a culture of empowerment and earning. The leadership of Local
7232 has variously promoted the unproductive psychologies of
entitlement and fear. We have heard through several sources that the
more mainstream and progressive labor leaders in Milwaukee
privately view the radical Local 7232 leadership as being distinctly
inept and mindlessly confrontational.

Our moral stewardship has been placed in question, and I think we
have adequately addressed that. We might review the social
responsibility of the leadership of Loca1 7232.

At Paragraph 304, the Bishop's Pastoral Letter wisely states that:
"The purpose of unions is not simply to defend the existing wages
and prerogatives of the fraction of workers who belong to them, but
also to enable workers to make positive and creative contributions to
the firm, the community, and the larger society in an organized and
cooperative way." Local 7232 leadership has not only failed to
support productivity partnerships like the Business Improvement
Teams, but has intimidated those union members who have chosen to
do so. As Fred Stratton, our Chief Executive Officer has said: "This
leadership prevents its members from participating in the kinds of
organized productivity improving processes that have become so
effective at our other plants, productivity improving processes that
could help offset the wage and benefit differential, productivity
improving processes that give people the opportunity to develop the
problem solving skills that Labor Secretary Robert Reich believes
will be in great demand in the 1990's."

Where is the human dignity in the berating of employees who
participate in the kinds of management/employee partnerships
encouraged in Chapter IV of the Bishop's Pastoral Letter under the
heading "A New American Experiment: Partnership For the Public
Good?"

The Bishop's Pastoral Letter at Paragraph 69 discusses the principle
of commutative justice: "Commutative justice calls for fundamental
fairness in all agreements and exchanges between individuals or
private social groups... For example, workers owe their employers
diligent work in exchange for their wages." Where is the
commutative justice in the union leadership's sponsorship of an
illegal slowdown?

It has been contended that jobs are being lost because Briggs
management wants even higher profits for corporate owners,
apparently inviting the dated characterization of these owners as rich
folks. A phenomenon which was ongoing during the drafting of the
Bishop's Pastoral Letter, and continues unabated today, should be a
consideration in any discussion of economic justice, and that is the
enormous growth in private pension funding. While in 1970 only
19% of the stock of American companies was owned by institutional
investors, by 1993 nearly 50% of the stock of America's large
businesses was held by institutional investors. In fact today, about
70% of Briggs & Stratton shareholders are institutional investors.
Institutional investors are largely pension trusts, mutual funds and
others providing retirement security to millions of working people.
For example, the California Public Employees Retirement System
alone controls $80 billion in pension investments. In order to provide
that retirement security, these institutional capital providers must
achieve a minimum return - the cost of capital. So simply being
"profitable" in the accounting sense is not enough. Would our
employees be happy with a 1% return on their retirement savings or
mutual funds?

Union leadership and company management must work together in
the future to develop solutions to save as many of the higher paying
Milwaukee jobs as possible and at the same time provide economic
returns adequate to insure retirement security for many thousands of
pensioners and mutual fund investors who count on us.

There is hope. In the recent elections for president of the union and
members of the executive board, Candace Schultz ran her presidential
campaign in opposition to the radical leadership. Her campaign
literature read: "A STRONG UNION IS ONE WHO WORKS WITH
THE COMPANY FOR THE WORKERS!!! CONFLICT BREEDS
CONFLICT!!!"

On December 9th, Ms. Schultz won the election, and her slate of
candidates won a majority of the positions on the executive
committee. The new group took office on January 2nd. A Milwaukee
Journal article entitled "Union Vote Ousts Leader Considered
Militant" on December 10, 1994 stated that: "Schultz said she had
decided to run out of the belief that "there should be a change" in top
union leadership in hopes of mending poor union - management
relations". The union's strident tactics with the company "didn't
work", she said. "We lost thousands of jobs." In a Milwaukee
Sentinel article on December 12th, Ms. Schultz stated "I think the
direction we have been going in is not progressive thinking for the
1990's."

So how does NCR feel about having based an entire article on the
negative corporate campaign of a now ousted militant leadership?

Your indictments of Briggs & Stratton and its management were
misguided and extraordinarily cruel. The Bishop's Pastoral Letter at
Paragraph 135 states that: "We believe that differences on complex
economic questions should be expressed in a spirit of mutual respect
and open dialogue."

Don't you owe us an apology?

Sincerely,

/s/
George R. Thompson III
Director of Corporate Communications and Community Relations

John S. Shiely
President and Chief Operating Officer