RITE AID OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC.
49 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2000–2022)
9 trusted published court opinions across 9 distinct cases
What public court records show
Public federal court records list RITE AID OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. as an employer in 49 distinct federal employment cases between 2000 and 2022.
Of the 9 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 7 ended in a ruling for the employer and 2 had a mixed result.
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Hostile Work Environment, and Failure To Accommodate.
Cases were filed across 3 states, most often in MD.
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 9 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
RITE AID OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC. appears in 9 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Cesiro v. Rite Aid of New York (2022) — Defendant Win. This case involved an employment law dispute between a worker named Cesiro and Rite Aid of New York. The case was filed in February 2022 in a New York federal court, but the available information doesn't provide details about the specific nature of the workplace dispute or what employment issues were at stake. Read the ruling.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Rite Aid Corp. (2010) — Mixed Result. Read the ruling.
Eastwood v. Department of Labor (2009) — Defendant Win. Maria Eastwood, a Rite Aid employee, had previously received workers' compensation for a shoulder injury. Later, she believed her shoulder condition had gotten worse and asked to reopen her workers' compensation case to receive additional benefits. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (2 of 9), Hostile Work Environment (2 of 9), Failure to Accommodate (2 of 9). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Hostile Work Environment and Failure to Accommodate.
Published opinions span Maryland (1), Pennsylvania (1), New York (1). Maryland 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. Maryland rulings, Pennsylvania rulings and New York rulings.
These published opinions sit within the retail sector, where wage-and-hour, scheduling, and Title VII harassment claims are the dominant categories.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
8 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 1 summary-judgment opinions, 0 ended the case in RITE AID OF PENNSYLVANIA, INC.’s favor and 1 let the worker’s claims continue.
What do these stages mean?
- Appeal
- A higher court reviewing an earlier decision. Many published opinions come from this stage, after a lot has already happened in the case.
- Summary judgment
- A ruling where the judge decides the case — or part of it — without a trial, because one side argues the key facts are not in dispute. For workers, getting past this step is often the biggest hurdle.
- Motion to dismiss
- An early request — usually by the employer — to throw the case out before any evidence is gathered.
- Other rulings
- Procedural decisions and orders that do not fit the main stages above.
Published federal-court opinions only — most workplace disputes are resolved privately. This is not anyone’s odds, and not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Facing something similar? Check your rights →
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 Retail employers
Browse trusted published opinions 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.