Skip to main content
Manufacturing

Caterpillar, Inc.

57 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (20002026)

14 trusted published court opinions across 9 distinct cases · 9 docket-only cases without a recorded end date

What public court records show

Public federal court records list Caterpillar, Inc. as an employer in 57 distinct federal employment cases between 2000 and 2026.

Of the 14 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 settled.

Plaintiffs won 3 of 12 adjudicated opinions (25%).

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

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

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.

14
Published Opinions Analyzed

Written decisions across 9 distinct cases.

25%
Plaintiff Win Rate

3 of 12 adjudicated opinions ended in a plaintiff win.

Does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.

3
States

Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.

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

About this employer

Caterpillar, Inc. appears in 14 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:

Bunch v. Caterpillar Logistics Inc. (2024) — Settlement. Workers filed a lawsuit against Caterpillar Logistics Inc., claiming the company failed to pay them properly under federal wage laws. The case involved multiple employees suing together, alleging the company violated the Fair Labor Standards Act—federal rules that protect workers' pay. Read the ruling.

Barnes v. Caterpillar Inc (2023) — Defendant Win. A worker at Caterpillar Inc. filed a lawsuit claiming he was fired because of his age, which would violate federal anti-discrimination laws. The employee argued that age was the real reason for his termination. Read the ruling.

Stein v. Department of Employment Security (2017) — Defendant Win. Mitchell Stein worked for Caterpillar, Inc. and was laid off. He applied for unemployment benefits, but the Department of Employment Security denied his claim, saying he wasn't actively searching for work. Stein appealed the decision, arguing he should receive the benefits he was entitled to. Read the ruling.

The published opinions primarily involve Retaliation (5 of 14), Discrimination (4 of 14), Harassment (2 of 14). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Retaliation, Discrimination and Harassment.

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 Illinois (3), Indiana (1), Ohio (1). Illinois 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. Illinois rulings, Indiana rulings and Ohio rulings.

These published opinions sit within the manufacturing sector, where OSHA whistleblower, FMLA, and disability-accommodation claims are most common.

Opinion Outcomes

Defendant Win
7 (50%)
Plaintiff Win
3 (21%)
Mixed Result
2 (14%)
Settlement
1 (7%)
Remanded
1 (7%)

Opinion Stages

14 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.

Appeal
9 (64%)
Summary judgment
3 (21%)

Of the 3 summary-judgment opinions, 1 ended the case in Caterpillar, Inc.’s favor and 2 let the worker’s claims continue.

Trial verdict
1 (7%)
Settlement / consent decree
1 (7%)
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.
Trial verdict
A judge or jury heard the evidence and reached a decision. Relatively few disputes get this far.
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 →

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. Caterpillar Inc
C.D. Ill. · Apr 2026
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
C.D. Ill. · Jan 2026
Employee v. Caterpillar, Inc.
C.D. Ill. · Dec 2025
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
C.D. Ill. · Aug 2025
Employee v. Caterpillar, Inc
C.D. Ill. · Feb 2025
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc.
C.D. Ill. · Feb 2025
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
C.D. Ill. · Sep 2024
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
C.D. Ill. · Sep 2024
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
C.D. Ill. · Jul 2024
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar, Inc.
C.D. Ill. · Jul 2024
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
C.D. Ill. · Jun 2024
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
N.D. Tex. · May 2024
Employee v. Caterpillar, Inc
C.D. Ill. · Jan 2024
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar Logistics Inc.
S.D. Ohio · Jan 2024 · Ohio · Wage Theft
Settlement
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
INND · Sep 2023 · Indiana · Discrimination
Defendant Win
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
C.D. Ill. · Aug 2023
Employee v. Caterpillar Logistics, Inc.
C.D. Ill. · Apr 2023
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar Logistics Inc.
W.D. Tex. · Sep 2022
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar, Inc
D. Colo. · May 2021
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
D. Colo. · Feb 2021
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
E.D. Ark. · Jun 2020
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar, Inc.
W.D. Tex. · Apr 2020
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar Logistics Inc.
S.D. Fla. · Dec 2019
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar, Inc.
W.D. Tex. · Dec 2019
Docket closed
Employee v. Caterpillar Inc
E.D. Ark. · Feb 2019
Docket closed
Showing 25 of 57

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.