Skip to main content
Transportation & Logistics

ABF Freight System, Inc.

19 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (19942025)

3 trusted published court opinions across 3 distinct cases · 2 docket-only cases without a recorded end date

What public court records show

Public federal court records list ABF Freight System, Inc. as an employer in 19 distinct federal employment cases between 1994 and 2025.

The most common claims on record were Wrongful Termination, Discrimination, and Retaliation.

Cases were filed across 3 states, most often in TX.

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.

3
Published Opinions Analyzed

Written decisions across 3 distinct cases.

3
States

Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.

Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

About this employer

ABF Freight System, Inc. appears in 3 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:

Green v. Labor Commission (2013) — Defendant Win. Green filed a case against the Labor Commission, raising employment law claims. The specific details of the dispute are not fully detailed in available records, but the case involved disagreements about employment-related matters that Green brought before the court system. Read the ruling.

ABF Freight System, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board (1994) — Plaintiff Win. This case involved a dispute between ABF Freight System, a trucking company, and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) over the company's labor practices. The NLRB had made a decision about whether ABF violated workers' rights under the National Labor Relations Act, which protects employees' rights to organize unio… Read the ruling.

The published opinions primarily involve Wrongful Termination, Discrimination, Retaliation. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Wrongful Termination, Discrimination and Retaliation.

Applicable statutes referenced across these rulings include: NLRA (29 U.S.C. §§ 151-169) — The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects the rights of employees to organize, form or join labor unions, bargain collectively through representatives of their choosing, and engage in other concerted activities for mutual aid or protection. See the NLRA reference page for filing deadlines, employee thresholds, and remedies. NLRA.

Published opinions span Texas (1), New Mexico (1), Utah (1). Texas 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. Texas rulings, New Mexico rulings and Utah rulings.

These published opinions sit within the transportation sector, where USERRA, FMLA, and DOT safety-retaliation claims appear alongside standard discrimination claims.

Claim Types

Related Laws

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 records

One row per court+docket case · written opinions stay grouped inside their case · plaintiff names redacted

Employee v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
S.D.N.Y. · Nov 2025
Employee v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
N.D. Ill. · Apr 2025
Employee v. ABF FREIGHT SYSTEM, INC.
W.D. Pa. · Nov 2022
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System Inc
E.D. Ark. · Oct 2020
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
S.D. Fla. · Oct 2019
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
C.D. Cal. · Aug 2019
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
M.D. Pa. · Jul 2019
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System Inc
W.D. Okla. · Dec 2018
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
C.D. Cal. · Jun 2018
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight Systems, Inc.
N.D. Ill. · May 2016
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight Systems Inc
S.D. Ill. · Jun 2015
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
M.D. Fla. · Nov 2014
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
W.D. Mo. · Nov 2014
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
W.D. Ark. · Aug 2014
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System Inc
C.D. Cal. · Dec 2013
Docket closed
Employee v. Labor Commission
Utah Ct. App. · Jul 2013 · Utah · Wrongful Termination
Defendant Win
Employee v. ABF Freight Systems, Inc.
M.D. Ala. · Mar 2013
Docket closed
Employee v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
TXNB · Dec 2009 · Texas · Wrongful Termination
Defendant Win
ABF Freight System, Inc. v. Employee
U.S. Supreme Court · Jan 1994 · New Mexico · Retaliation
Plaintiff Win
Showing 19 of 19

Understand your employment rights

Free, private, no sign-up required.

Check My Rights

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.