1-800-Flowers.com, Inc.
7 federal employment cases from public court records (2012–2024)
2 with a published ruling · 5 open dockets
What public court records show
Public federal court records list 1-800-Flowers.com, Inc. as an employer in 7 employment matters between 2012 and 2024.
The most common claims on record were Wage Theft, Discrimination, and Failure To Accommodate.
Cases were filed across 2 states, most often in OH.
These figures summarize publicly available U.S. federal court records only. Most workplace disputes are resolved privately and never appear in litigation. A case outcome reflects many factors and is not a finding that any employer violated the law.
About this employer
1-800-Flowers.com, Inc. appears in 2 federal employment-law court rulings on record. These cases sit within the retail sector, where wage-and-hour, scheduling, and Title VII harassment claims are the dominant categories. The set below covers rulings that produced written federal-court decisions; private settlements, EEOC charges resolved without litigation, and state-court cases are not included.
The cases primarily involve Wage Theft, Discrimination, Failure to Accommodate. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Wage Theft, Discrimination and Failure to Accommodate.
Rulings span Ohio (1), New York (1). Ohio is an EEOC deferral state, which extends the federal Title VII / ADA / ADEA filing deadline from 180 to 300 days. Browse state-specific employment rulings for jurisdictional patterns. Ohio rulings and New York rulings.
Claim Types
Federal cases
public court recordsOne row per case · a badge means the case reached a published ruling · plaintiff names redacted
Other Retail employers
Browse rulings involving similar workplaces.
Data sourced from public federal court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes extracted using AI analysis. This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The presence of an employer on this page does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.