Commitments and Contingencies |
3 Months Ended |
|---|---|
Apr. 30, 2022 | |
| Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] | |
| Commitments and Contingencies | Contingencies We are defendants in legal proceedings including the class, collective, representative and large cases described below as well as individual claims in arbitration. We will vigorously defend ourselves in these matters. We do not believe that any of these matters will, individually or in the aggregate, have a material effect on our business or financial condition. We cannot give assurance, however, that one or more of these matters will not have a material effect on our results of operations for the quarter or year in which they are resolved.
We assess our legal proceedings monthly and reserves are established if a loss is probable and the amount of such loss can be reasonably estimated. For matters that have settled, we reserve the estimated settlement amount even if the settlement has not been approved by the court. Many, if not substantially all, of our legal proceedings are subject to significant uncertainties and, therefore, determining the likelihood of a loss and the measurement of any loss can be complex and subject to judgment. With respect to legal proceedings where we have determined that a loss is reasonably possible but not probable, we are unable to estimate the amount or range of the reasonably possible loss due to the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of and uncertainties regarding legal proceedings. Our assessments are based on estimates and assumptions that have been deemed reasonable by management, but that may prove to be incomplete or inaccurate, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur that might cause us to change those estimates and assumptions. Management’s assessment of legal proceedings could change because of future determinations or the discovery of facts which are not presently known. Accordingly, the ultimate costs of resolving these proceedings may be substantially higher or lower than currently estimated.
Dollar Tree Active Matters
The Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) has alleged that we improperly sold certain topically applied, over the counter (“OTC”) products manufactured by certain Chinese factories that were on an import “alert” restriction issued by the FDA. We believe we have made significant improvements in our processes, and the FDA has asked us to make certain additional improvements, which we are addressing.
Actual or threatened California state court lawsuits have been filed against Dollar Tree and Family Dollar for similar employment-related claims brought under the Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”). These cases may allege violations such as failure to provide employees with compliant rest and meal breaks, suitable seating and overtime pay, reimburse business expenses, pay minimum wages for all time worked, provide accurate wage statements, and timely pay wages as well as other off-the-clock and potential labor code violations.
Three personal injury lawsuits are pending against Dollar Tree and one against Family Dollar alleging that certain talc products that were sold in the past caused cancer, one of which is set for trial this year. Although we have been able to resolve previous talc lawsuits against us without material loss to the company, given the inherent uncertainties of litigation there can be no assurances regarding the outcome of pending or future cases. Future costs to litigate these cases are not known but may be material, and it is uncertain whether our costs will be covered by insurance. In addition, although we have indemnification rights against our vendors in several of these cases, it is uncertain whether the vendors will have the financial ability to carry out their obligations.
Family Dollar Active Matters
On February 11, 2022, the FDA issued Form 483 observations primarily regarding rodent infestation at our West Memphis, Arkansas distribution center (“DC 202”) and the related sale and distribution of adulterated product, as well as other processes and procedures that require remediation. In connection therewith, we initiated a voluntary retail-level product recall of FDA and U.S. Department of Agriculture-regulated products stored and shipped from DC 202 from January 1, 2021 through February 18, 2022 (the “Recall”), closed DC 202 for extensive cleaning, temporarily closed the affected stores to permit the removal and destruction of inventory subject to the Recall, ceased sales of relevant inventory subject to the Recall, ceased the shipment of FDA-regulated products from DC 202, and initiated corrective actions. We are taking this matter extremely seriously and are responding to all observations made in the Form 483. The circumstances leading to the Recall (and/or the Recall itself) may have other negative impacts, which could include reputational damage, lost sales, further or additional governmental investigations and/or enforcement actions, and/or private litigation (see below), which could have a material adverse effect, individually or collectively, on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition.
Since February 22, 2022, we have received 13 class action complaints primarily related to issues associated with DC 202 described above. The lawsuits are in federal court in Mississippi, Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Alabama, and Missouri and allege violations of the Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Alabama and Missouri consumer protection laws, breach of warranty, and unjust enrichment related to the sale of products that may be contaminated by virtue of rodent infestation and other unsanitary conditions. Plaintiffs seek damages, attorney fees and costs, punitive damages and the replacement of, or refund of, money paid to purchase the relevant products, and any other legal relief available for their claims (in each case in unspecified amounts), including equitable and injunctive relief. A hearing is scheduled in late May to determine whether these cases should proceed using the federal court’s multidistrict litigation process.
On March 1, 2022, a federal grand jury subpoena was issued to us by the Eastern District of Arkansas requesting the production of information, documents and records pertaining to pests, sanitation, compliance with law, and the issues described above. We intend to cooperate fully with the subpoena and any related investigation, however, no assurance can be given as to the timing or outcome of this matter.
On April 28, 2022, the State of Arkansas filed a complaint in state court alleging violations of the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, gross negligence and negligence, strict liability in tort, unjust enrichment and civil conspiracy related to the sale of products that may have been contaminated by virtue of rodent infestation and other unsanitary conditions. The State of Arkansas is seeking injunctive relief, restitution, disgorgement, damages, civil penalties, punitive damages and suspension or revocation of our authorization to do business in Arkansas.
In January, April, and September 2021, state-wide consumer class actions were filed against us by the same law firm in Georgia, Alabama and Florida, respectively, for breach of warranty based on the allegation that the coffee we sold was mislabeled because the canisters did not contain enough coffee to make the number of cups of coffee stated on the label.
Please see the description above for PAGA lawsuits and one talc lawsuit against Family Dollar.
Family Dollar Resolved Matters
In August 2020 and July 2021, consumer class actions were filed against us in New York and Illinois, respectively, alleging Smoked Almonds sold by us are mislabeled because the almonds do not go through a smoking process but rather acquire their smoky taste through the use of smoked flavoring. Both actions alleged violation of consumer protection laws, negligent misrepresentation, breach of warranties, fraud and unjust enrichment. Both have been dismissed with prejudice.
|