Fred Meyer Stores, Inc.
39 distinct federal cases coded as employment matters from public court records (2000–2026)
5 trusted published court opinions across 5 distinct cases · 2 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
In public federal court records, Fred Meyer Stores, Inc. is named as a party in 39 federal cases coded as employment matters between 2000 and 2026.
The most common claims on record were Wrongful Termination, Retaliation, and Breach Of Contract.
Cases were filed across 2 states, most often in CO.
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.
Written decisions across 5 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Fred Meyer Stores, Inc. appears in 5 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Christine Tedder v. Harris Teeter, Employer (2026) — Plaintiff Win. Christine Tedder was injured in Harris Teeter's parking lot while parking her car in an area the company required employees to use. The employer initially denied her workers' compensation claim, arguing that the parking lot injury fell outside the scope of employment. Read the ruling.
Rra-Shada v. King Soopers (2023) — Dismissed. Rra-Shada filed a lawsuit against King Soopers claiming wrongful termination, breach of contract, and a hostile work environment. The case involved questions about disability rights under federal law. Read the ruling.
National Labor Relations Board v. King Soopers, Inc. (2001) — Plaintiff Win. This case involved King Soopers grocery stores and their treatment of union workers. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) accused the company of breaking federal labor law in several ways: threatening to fire a union shop steward, unfairly enforcing rules about what could be posted on employee bulletin boards to t… Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Wrongful Termination (4 of 5), Retaliation (2 of 5), Breach of Contract. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Wrongful Termination, Retaliation and Breach of Contract.
Applicable statutes referenced across these rulings include: ADA (42 U.S.C. §§ 12111-12117) — The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in all aspects of employment. See the ADA reference page for filing deadlines, employee thresholds, and remedies. ADA.
Published opinions span Colorado (1), South Carolina (1). Colorado 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. Colorado rulings and South Carolina rulings.
These published opinions sit within the retail sector, where wage-and-hour, scheduling, and Title VII harassment claims are the dominant categories.
Claim Types
What these numbers mean
A case is one lawsuit, identified by its court and docket number. The docket is the running court record for that same case — it is not an extra case.
A published opinion or ruling is a written court decision. One case can produce several opinions, so opinion counts and case counts answer different questions. Only trusted, reportable opinions are used in the outcome statistics on this page.
Docket entries are the individual filings inside a case — motions, orders, scheduling notices. We read them to confirm a case is real and to see where it got to, but an entry is never counted as a case or as an outcome. A single case can generate hundreds of entries.
Far fewer opinions than cases is normal. Many employment cases settle privately or close without a published opinion. No opinion here does not mean the worker lost; it means this public record does not show a reportable result.
Everything on this page comes from public federal court records. Where we are not confident a record is accurate, we leave it out rather than guess.
Federal court cases
public court recordsOne row per court+docket case · written opinions stay grouped inside their case · plaintiff names redacted
Other court records naming this party
4 published opinions name this party but are not coded with an employment claim. Some are labor, unemployment or workers’ compensation matters whose claim type was not recorded; others are not employment disputes at all. They are not counted in any figure on this page, and no outcome is shown for them.
Other employers with published opinions
Browse trusted published opinions involving other employers.
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.