Anheuser-Busch, Inc.
31 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2002–2026)
13 trusted published court opinions across 12 distinct cases · 3 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Anheuser-Busch, Inc. as an employer in 31 distinct federal employment cases between 2002 and 2026.
Of the 13 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 7 ended in a ruling for the employer, 3 ended in a ruling for the worker, 2 had a mixed result, and 1 were sent back to a lower court.
Plaintiffs won 3 of 12 adjudicated opinions (25%).
The most common claims on record were Retaliation, Breach Of Contract, and Whistleblower.
Cases were filed across 3 states, most often in OH.
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 12 distinct cases.
3 of 12 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
Anheuser-Busch, Inc. appears in 13 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Thomas Overby, Jr. v. Anheuser-Busch, LLC (2026) — Remanded. Thomas Overby Jr. and other Anheuser-Busch employees filed a lawsuit claiming the company failed to pay them properly (wage theft) and fired them unfairly (wrongful termination). The workers wanted to combine their cases into one large class action lawsuit so they could sue together. Read the ruling.
Hunter Levi v. United States Dept of Labor (2010) — Defendant Win. Hunter Levi worked for Anheuser-Busch Companies and filed a whistleblower complaint under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, claiming he faced retaliation for reporting wrongdoing at the company. Read the ruling.
Hunter Levi v. United States Dept of Labor (2010) — Defendant Win. Hunter Levi worked for Anheuser-Busch and filed three whistleblower complaints under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act with the Department of Labor. This law protects employees who report corporate wrongdoing or fraud. Levi claimed he faced retaliation for blowing the whistle on problems at his company. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Retaliation (4 of 13), Breach of Contract (3 of 13), Whistleblower (2 of 13). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Retaliation, Breach of Contract and Whistleblower.
Published opinions span Ohio (2), Missouri (1), Virginia (1). Ohio 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. Ohio rulings, Missouri rulings and Virginia rulings.
These published opinions sit within the broader workplace context.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
13 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 1 summary-judgment opinions, 0 ended the case in Anheuser-Busch, 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.
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 Food Processing 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.