Charter Communications Inc.
113 distinct federal cases coded as employment matters from public court records (2011–2026)
9 trusted published court opinions across 9 distinct cases · 12 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
In public federal court records, Charter Communications Inc. is named as a party in 113 federal cases coded as employment matters between 2011 and 2026.
Of the 7 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 4 ended in a ruling for the employer, 2 had a mixed result, and 1 ended in a ruling for the worker.
2 further opinions are listed below but left out of these outcome figures, because the employer brought the case or was not a party to it.
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Retaliation, and Wrongful Termination.
Cases were filed across 6 states, most often in NY.
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 9 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Charter Communications Inc. appears in 9 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Schuster v. Charter Communications, Inc. (2022) — Defendant Win. Read the ruling.
Rossova v. Charter Communications, LLC (2022) — Plaintiff Win. A woman was hired by Charter Communications to work in the brand and creative strategy department. She reported having a good working relationship with her supervisor initially. Read the ruling.
Desmond v. Charter Communications, Inc. (2021) — Defendant Win. Desmond filed a lawsuit against Charter Communications, claiming she was fired due to discrimination based on her gender or age, retaliation for complaining, harassment, or failure to accommodate a disability. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (8 of 9), Retaliation (6 of 9), Wrongful Termination (6 of 9). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Retaliation and Wrongful Termination.
Published opinions span New York (4), Michigan (1), Ohio (1), Connecticut (1). New York 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. New York rulings, Michigan rulings, Ohio rulings and Connecticut rulings.
These published opinions sit within the technology sector, where age-discrimination, non-compete, and whistleblower-retaliation claims appear frequently.
Opinion Outcomes
2 listed opinions are not counted here: the employer brought the case, or was not a party to an appeal against an agency, so the recorded outcome is not a result for or against a worker.
Opinion Stages
7 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 2 summary-judgment opinions, 2 ended the case in Charter Communications Inc.’s favor and 0 let the worker’s claims continue.
What do these stages mean?
- 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.
- Trial verdict
- A judge or jury heard the evidence and reached a decision. Relatively few disputes get this far.
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
4 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. Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc.E.D. Mo. · 2021 · Missouri
- Employee v. Charter Communications, LLC, Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic DevelopmentMinn. Ct. App. · 2016
- Employee v. Charter Communications, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic DevelopmentMinn. Ct. App. · 2015
- Employee v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS VII, LLCM.D. Ala. · 2005 · Alabama
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.