Bank of America, N.A.
258 distinct federal cases coded as employment matters from public court records (2005–2025)
6 trusted published court opinions across 6 distinct cases · 3 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
In public federal court records, Bank of America, N.A. is named as a defendant in 258 federal cases coded as employment matters between 2005 and 2025.
Of the 6 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 2 were dismissed, 1 ended in a ruling for the worker, 1 ended in a ruling for the employer, and 1 settled.
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Wage Theft, and Hostile Work Environment.
Cases were filed across 5 states, most often in WA.
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 6 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Bank of America, N.A. appears in 6 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
HSUEH v. BANK OF AMERICA HUMAN RESOURCES (2020) — Dismissed. Hsueh filed a lawsuit against Bank of America, claiming age discrimination in employment. The case was brought in federal court in New Jersey. Read the ruling.
Boyd v. Bank of America, N.A. (2020) — Settlement. Mortgage brokers and lending officers at Bank of America claimed the bank improperly deducted money from their paychecks. Specifically, employees said the bank subtracted pay for rest breaks and work that wasn't directly related to sales, even though company policy or law required these activities to be paid. Read the ruling.
Stiner v. Bank of America (2020) — Dismissed. Stiner filed a lawsuit against Bank of America claiming discrimination, harassment, and a hostile work environment. The complaint was submitted to court in April 2020. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (3 of 6), Wage Theft (2 of 6), Hostile Work Environment (2 of 6). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Wage Theft and Hostile Work Environment.
Published opinions span Washington (1), New Jersey (1), Hawaii (1), New York (1). Washington 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. Washington rulings, New Jersey rulings, Hawaii rulings and New York rulings.
These published opinions sit within the financial services sector, where Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank whistleblower protections often supplement standard Title VII claims.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
5 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 1 summary-judgment opinions, 1 ended the case in Bank of America, N.A.’s favor and 0 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.
- Settlement / consent decree
- The two sides resolved the dispute by agreement, sometimes with court approval. Most settlements are private and never show up in published opinions.
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 court records naming this party
8 published opinions name this party but are not coded with an employment claim. Some are labor, unemployment or workers’ compensation matters whose claim type was not recorded; others are not employment disputes at all. They are not counted in any figure on this page, and no outcome is shown for them.
- Employee v. Bank of America, N.A.S.D.N.Y. · 2022 · New York
- Employee v. Bank of America CorporationS.D.N.Y. · 2021 · New York
- Employee v. Bank of America, N.A.Tex. App.—5th Dist. · 2021
- Employee v. Bank of AmericaN.D. Ill. · 2018 · Illinois
- Employee v. Bank of America, N.A.N.D. Ala. · 2017 · Alabama
- Employee v. Bank of Am.NYAPPTERM · 2016
- Employee v. Bank of AmericaGa. Ct. App. · 2015
- Employee v. Bank of America, N.A.D. Md. · 2003 · Maryland
Other employers with published opinions
Browse trusted published opinions involving other employers.
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.