Amalgamated Transit Union
20 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2001–2025)
23 trusted published court opinions across 20 distinct cases
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Amalgamated Transit Union as an employer in 20 distinct federal employment cases between 2001 and 2025.
Of the 23 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 12 ended in a ruling for the employer, 6 were dismissed, 4 ended in a ruling for the worker, and 1 had a mixed result.
Plaintiffs won 4 of 23 adjudicated opinions (17%).
The most common claims on record were Breach Of Contract, Retaliation, and Discrimination.
Cases were filed across 6 states, most often in DC.
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 20 distinct cases.
4 of 23 adjudicated opinions ended in a plaintiff win.
Does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Amalgamated Transit Union appears in 23 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Abdulhussain v. Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1433 (2025) — Dismissed. This case involved a dispute between a worker named Abdulhussain and Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1433. The worker filed claims related to civil rights violations and employment discrimination against the union, though the specific details of what allegedly happened are not available from the court records provided. Read the ruling.
Barnes v. Amalgamated Transit Union (2022) — Defendant Win. A worker named Barnes filed a lawsuit against the Amalgamated Transit Union in August 2022. The case involved claims of civil rights violations and employment discrimination. Read the ruling.
Mendoza v. Amalgamated Transit Union International (2019) — Dismissed. This case involved a dispute between an individual named Mendoza and the Amalgamated Transit Union International, a major labor union that represents transit workers across North America. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Breach of Contract (14 of 23), Retaliation (5 of 23), Discrimination (3 of 23). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Breach of Contract, Retaliation and Discrimination.
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 District of Columbia (8), Nevada (2), Indiana (1), New York (1). District of Columbia 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. District of Columbia rulings, Nevada rulings, Indiana rulings and New York rulings.
These published opinions sit within the nonprofit sector, where mission-alignment defenses sometimes complicate Title VII analysis.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
23 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 5 summary-judgment opinions, 2 ended the case in Amalgamated Transit Union’s favor and 3 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.
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 Nonprofit 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.