Citigroup, Inc.
66 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (1999–2026)
11 trusted published court opinions across 11 distinct cases · 14 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Citigroup, Inc. as an employer in 66 distinct federal employment cases between 1999 and 2026.
Of the 11 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 8 ended in a ruling for the employer, 1 ended in a ruling for the worker, 1 was dismissed, and 1 had a mixed result.
Plaintiffs won 1 of 11 adjudicated opinions (9%).
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Breach Of Contract, and Retaliation.
Cases were filed across 4 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 11 distinct cases.
1 of 11 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
Citigroup, Inc. appears in 11 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Burgos v. Citibank, N.A (2024) — Defendant Win. An employee named Burgos sued Citibank, claiming the bank failed to pay wages owed and retaliated against them for complaining about pay issues. Read the ruling.
Patricia Abram-Adams v. Citigroup, Inc. (2012) — Defendant Win. Based on the limited information available, Patricia Abram-Adams brought an employment law case against Citigroup, Inc. in 2012. However, the court records provided do not contain enough details to explain what specific workplace dispute occurred between Ms. Abram-Adams and her employer. Read the ruling.
Abram-Adams v. Citigroup, Inc. (2012) — Defendant Win. An employee named Abram-Adams sued Citigroup claiming discrimination and wrongful termination. The worker believed they were treated unfairly and illegally fired from their job at the major financial company. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (4 of 11), Breach of Contract (4 of 11), Retaliation (2 of 11). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Breach of Contract and Retaliation.
Published opinions span New York (6), New Jersey (1), Pennsylvania (1), California (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, New Jersey rulings, Pennsylvania rulings and California 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
11 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 3 summary-judgment opinions, 1 ended the case in Citigroup, Inc.’s favor and 2 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 Finance 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.