Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Jan. 28, 2012
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS In September 2006, a class action complaint was filed against us in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, alleging that we violated certain California wage and hour laws by misclassifying California store managers as exempt employees (“Seals matter”). The plaintiffs sought to recover, on their own behalf and on behalf of all other individuals who are similarly situated, damages for alleged unpaid overtime, unpaid minimum wages, wages not paid upon termination, improper wage statements, missed rest breaks, missed meal periods, reimbursement of expenses, loss of unused vacation time, and attorneys' fees and costs. In October 2009, the court denied, with prejudice, plaintiffs' class certification motion. In January 2010, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal. In April 2011, the California Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision denying class certification. In December 2011, we entered into confidential settlement agreements with each of the plaintiffs, and the court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims in January 2012. The Seals matter was resolved without a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. In February 2008, three alleged class action complaints were filed against us by a California resident (“Caron matter”). The first was filed in the Superior Court of California, Orange County. That action was similar in nature to the Seals matter, which enabled us to successfully coordinate that matter with the Seals matter in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County. The second and third matters, filed in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, and the Superior Court of California, Riverside County, respectively, alleged that we violated certain California wage and hour laws for missed meal and rest periods and other wage and hour claims. The plaintiffs sought to recover, on their own behalf and on behalf of a California statewide class consisting of all other individuals who are similarly situated, damages resulting from improper wage statements, missed rest breaks, missed meal periods, non-payment of wages at termination, reimbursement of expenses, loss of unused vacation time, and attorneys' fees and costs. We believed these two matters overlapped and we successfully consolidated them before the U.S. District Court, Central District of California. We believe the remaining allegations also overlap some portion of the claims released through the class action settlement in the Espinosa matter, which was settled in 2008. In August 2009, the court denied, without prejudice, the plaintiffs' class certification motion. In April 2010, the court granted, with prejudice, our motion to deny class certification. Accordingly, the claims of one plaintiff remained before the court. The Caron matter is similar in nature to the Sample matter described below. In June 2010, a representative enforcement action was filed against us in the Superior Court of California, Alameda County, alleging that we violated certain California wage and hour laws for missed meal and rest periods and other wage and hour claims (“Sample matter”). The plaintiff seeks to recover, on her behalf and on behalf of a California statewide class consisting of all other individuals who are similarly situated, damages resulting from allegedly unpaid overtime, unpaid meal period premiums, unpaid rest period premiums, unpaid business expenses, non-payment of wages at termination, untimely payment of wages, noncompliant wage statements, failure to provide seating, and attorneys' fees and costs. In December 2011, we entered into a confidential settlement agreement with the plaintiffs in the Caron and Sample matters. The settlement remains subject to objection and requires court approval to become final. We currently believe that the Caron and Sample matters will collectively be resolved without a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. In February 2011, a class action complaint was filed against us in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, alleging that we violated certain California wage and hour laws (“Martinez matter”). The plaintiffs seek to recover, on behalf of the named plaintiff and a California statewide class consisting of all other similarly situated current and former warehouse employees, damages for alleged missed meal periods, unpaid meal period premiums, unpaid overtime, unpaid vested vacation, unpaid wages at termination, untimely payment of wages, noncompliant wage statements, failure to keep accurate payroll records, and attorneys' fees and costs. We answered the plaintiff's complaint in March 2011. The parties engaged in limited discovery. In February 2012, we entered into a confidential settlement agreement with the plaintiffs and the court preliminarily approved the settlement in March 2012. The settlement remains subject to objection and requires further court approval to become final. We currently believe that the Martinez matter will be resolved without a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. We are involved in other legal actions and claims arising in the ordinary course of business. We currently believe that each such action and claim will be resolved without a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. However, litigation involves an element of uncertainty. Future developments could cause these actions or claims to have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity. For a discussion of discontinued operations, including KB Toys matters, see note 13. We are self-insured for certain losses relating to property, general liability, workers' compensation, and employee medical and dental benefit claims, a portion of which is paid by employees, and we have purchased stop-loss coverage in order to limit significant exposure in these areas. Accrued insurance liabilities are actuarially determined based on claims filed and estimates of claims incurred but not reported. We have purchase obligations for outstanding purchase orders for merchandise issued in the ordinary course of our business that are valued at $514.0 million, the entirety of which represents obligations due within one year of January 28, 2012. In addition, we have a purchase commitment for future inventory purchases totaling $80.8 million at January 28, 2012. We paid $28.0 million, $29.7 million, and $28.9 million related to this commitment during 2011, 2010, and 2009, respectively. We are not required to meet any periodic minimum purchase requirements under this commitment. The term of the commitment extends until the purchase requirement is satisfied. We have additional purchase obligations in the amount of $221.2 million primarily related to distribution and transportation, information technology, print advertising, energy procurement, and other store security, supply, and maintenance commitments.

COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

In September 2006, a class action complaint was filed against us in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, alleging that we violated certain California wage and hour laws by misclassifying California store managers as exempt employees (“Seals matter”). The plaintiffs sought to recover, on their own behalf and on behalf of all other individuals who are similarly situated, damages for alleged unpaid overtime, unpaid minimum wages, wages not paid upon termination, improper wage statements, missed rest breaks, missed meal periods, reimbursement of expenses, loss of unused vacation time, and attorneys' fees and costs. In October 2009, the court denied, with prejudice, plaintiffs' class certification motion. In January 2010, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal. In April 2011, the California Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision denying class certification. In December 2011, we entered into confidential settlement agreements with each of the plaintiffs, and the court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims in January 2012. The Seals matter was resolved without a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity.

In February 2008, three alleged class action complaints were filed against us by a California resident (“Caron matter”). The first was filed in the Superior Court of California, Orange County. That action was similar in nature to the Seals matter, which enabled us to successfully coordinate that matter with the Seals matter in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County. The second and third matters, filed in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, and the Superior Court of California, Riverside County, respectively, alleged that we violated certain California wage and hour laws for missed meal and rest periods and other wage and hour claims. The plaintiffs sought to recover, on their own behalf and on behalf of a California statewide class consisting of all other individuals who are similarly situated, damages resulting from improper wage statements, missed rest breaks, missed meal periods, non-payment of wages at termination, reimbursement of expenses, loss of unused vacation time, and attorneys' fees and costs. We believed these two matters overlapped and we successfully consolidated them before the U.S. District Court, Central District of California. We believe the remaining allegations also overlap some portion of the claims released through the class action settlement in the Espinosa matter, which was settled in 2008. In August 2009, the court denied, without prejudice, the plaintiffs' class certification motion. In April 2010, the court granted, with prejudice, our motion to deny class certification. Accordingly, the claims of one plaintiff remained before the court. The Caron matter is similar in nature to the Sample matter described below.

In June 2010, a representative enforcement action was filed against us in the Superior Court of California, Alameda County, alleging that we violated certain California wage and hour laws for missed meal and rest periods and other wage and hour claims (“Sample matter”). The plaintiff seeks to recover, on her behalf and on behalf of a California statewide class consisting of all other individuals who are similarly situated, damages resulting from allegedly unpaid overtime, unpaid meal period premiums, unpaid rest period premiums, unpaid business expenses, non-payment of wages at termination, untimely payment of wages, noncompliant wage statements, failure to provide seating, and attorneys' fees and costs. In December 2011, we entered into a confidential settlement agreement with the plaintiffs in the Caron and Sample matters. The settlement remains subject to objection and requires court approval to become final. We currently believe that the Caron and Sample matters will collectively be resolved without a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity.

In February 2011, a class action complaint was filed against us in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, alleging that we violated certain California wage and hour laws (“Martinez matter”). The plaintiffs seek to recover, on behalf of the named plaintiff and a California statewide class consisting of all other similarly situated current and former warehouse employees, damages for alleged missed meal periods, unpaid meal period premiums, unpaid overtime, unpaid vested vacation, unpaid wages at termination, untimely payment of wages, noncompliant wage statements, failure to keep accurate payroll records, and attorneys' fees and costs. We answered the plaintiff's complaint in March 2011. The parties engaged in limited discovery. In February 2012, we entered into a confidential settlement agreement with the plaintiffs and the court preliminarily approved the settlement in March 2012. The settlement remains subject to objection and requires further court approval to become final. We currently believe that the Martinez matter will be resolved without a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity.

We are involved in other legal actions and claims arising in the ordinary course of business. We currently believe that each such action and claim will be resolved without a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity. However, litigation involves an element of uncertainty. Future developments could cause these actions or claims to have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and liquidity.

For a discussion of discontinued operations, including KB Toys matters, see note 13.

We are self-insured for certain losses relating to property, general liability, workers' compensation, and employee medical and dental benefit claims, a portion of which is paid by employees, and we have purchased stop-loss coverage in order to limit significant exposure in these areas. Accrued insurance liabilities are actuarially determined based on claims filed and estimates of claims incurred but not reported.

We have purchase obligations for outstanding purchase orders for merchandise issued in the ordinary course of our business that are valued at $514.0 million, the entirety of which represents obligations due within one year of January 28, 2012. In addition, we have a purchase commitment for future inventory purchases totaling $80.8 million at January 28, 2012. We paid $28.0 million, $29.7 million, and $28.9 million related to this commitment during 2011, 2010, and 2009, respectively. We are not required to meet any periodic minimum purchase requirements under this commitment. The term of the commitment extends until the purchase requirement is satisfied. We have additional purchase obligations in the amount of $221.2 million primarily related to distribution and transportation, information technology, print advertising, energy procurement, and other store security, supply, and maintenance commitments.