Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Apr. 30, 2011
Contingencies
Contingencies	NOTE 9 - CONTINGENCIES LEGAL CONTINGENCIES On February 2, 2011, the plaintiffs in Dawn Till and Mary Josephs v. Saks Incorporated et al, filed a complaint, with which the Company was served on March 10, 2011, in a purported class and collective action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint alleges that the plaintiffs were improperly classified as exempt from the overtime pay requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the California Labor Code and that the Company failed to pay overtime, provide itemized wage statements and provide meal and rest periods. On March 8, 2011, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding a claim for penalties under the California Private Attorneys General Act of 2004. The plaintiffs seek to proceed collectively under the FLSA and as a class under the California statutes on behalf of individuals who have been employed by OFF 5TH as Selling and Service Managers, Merchandise Team Managers, or Department Managers. The Company believes that its managers at OFF 5TH have been properly classified as exempt under both federal and state law and intends to defend the lawsuit vigorously. It is not possible to predict whether the court will permit this action to proceed collectively or as a class. In addition to the litigation described in the preceding paragraph, the Company is involved in legal proceedings arising from its normal business activities and has accruals for losses where appropriate. Management believes that none of these legal proceedings will have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or liquidity. INCOME TAXES The Company is routinely under examination by federal, state or local taxing authorities in the areas of income taxes and the remittance of sales and use taxes. These examinations include questioning the timing and amount of deductions, the allocation of income among various tax jurisdictions, and compliance with federal, state and local tax laws. Based on current evaluations of tax filing positions, the Company believes it has adequately accrued for its income tax exposures. As of April 30, 2011, certain state examinations were ongoing. To the extent the Company were to prevail in matters for which accruals have been established or be required to pay amounts in excess of reserves, the Company's effective tax rate in a given financial statement period may be materially impacted. OTHER MATTERS From time to time the Company has issued guarantees to landlords under leases of stores operated by its subsidiaries. Certain of these stores were sold in connection with the Saks Department Store Group and Northern Department Store Group transactions which occurred in July 2005 and March 2006, respectively. If the purchasers fail to perform certain obligations under the lease agreements guaranteed by the Company, the Company could have obligations to landlords under such guarantees. Based on the information currently available, management does not believe that its potential obligations under these lease guarantees would be material.

NOTE 9 - CONTINGENCIES

LEGAL CONTINGENCIES

On February 2, 2011, the plaintiffs in Dawn Till and Mary Josephs v. Saks Incorporated et al, filed a complaint, with which the Company was served on March 10, 2011, in a purported class and collective action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint alleges that the plaintiffs were improperly classified as exempt from the overtime pay requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the California Labor Code and that the Company failed to pay overtime, provide itemized wage statements and provide meal and rest periods. On March 8, 2011, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding a claim for penalties under the California Private Attorneys General Act of 2004. The plaintiffs seek to proceed collectively under the FLSA and as a class under the California statutes on behalf of individuals who have been employed by OFF 5TH as Selling and Service Managers, Merchandise Team Managers, or Department Managers. The Company believes that its managers at OFF 5TH have been properly classified as exempt under both federal and state law and intends to defend the lawsuit vigorously. It is not possible to predict whether the court will permit this action to proceed collectively or as a class.

In addition to the litigation described in the preceding paragraph, the Company is involved in legal proceedings arising from its normal business activities and has accruals for losses where appropriate. Management believes that none of these legal proceedings will have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or liquidity.

INCOME TAXES

The Company is routinely under examination by federal, state or local taxing authorities in the areas of income taxes and the remittance of sales and use taxes. These examinations include questioning the timing and amount of deductions, the allocation of income among various tax jurisdictions, and compliance with federal, state and local tax laws. Based on current evaluations of tax filing positions, the Company believes it has adequately accrued for its income tax exposures. As of April 30, 2011, certain state examinations were ongoing. To the extent the Company were to prevail in matters for which accruals have been established or be required to pay amounts in excess of reserves, the Company's effective tax rate in a given financial statement period may be materially impacted.

OTHER MATTERS

From time to time the Company has issued guarantees to landlords under leases of stores operated by its subsidiaries. Certain of these stores were sold in connection with the Saks Department Store Group and Northern Department Store Group transactions which occurred in July 2005 and March 2006, respectively. If the purchasers fail to perform certain obligations under the lease agreements guaranteed by the Company, the Company could have obligations to landlords under such guarantees. Based on the information currently available, management does not believe that its potential obligations under these lease guarantees would be material.