City University of New York
43 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (1998–2026)
14 trusted published court opinions analyzed; 12 map to 8 distinct cases · 14 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
Public federal court records list City University of New York as an employer in 43 distinct federal employment cases between 1998 and 2026.
Of the 14 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 5 had a mixed result, 3 ended in a ruling for the worker, 3 were dismissed, and 2 ended in a ruling for the employer.
Plaintiffs won 3 of 13 adjudicated opinions (23%).
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Retaliation, and Hostile Work Environment.
Cases were filed across 1 state (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 8 distinct cases.
3 of 13 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
City University of New York appears in 14 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Fellah v. City University of New York (2022) — Mixed Result. Michelle Fellah worked at City University of New York and filed a lawsuit claiming she faced discrimination, harassment, and a hostile work environment. She also alleged retaliation and named another person, Miller, as a defendant, claiming Miller supervised or enabled the mistreatment. Read the ruling.
Dikambi v. City University of New York (2022) — Plaintiff Win. This case involved a discrimination lawsuit filed by an employee named Dikambi against the City University of New York (CUNY) in 2022. The employee alleged that CUNY discriminated against them, though the specific details of what type of discrimination occurred or the circumstances surrounding it are not available from… Read the ruling.
Stinson v. CUNY (2022) — Dismissed. This case involved a worker who filed discrimination claims against the City University of New York (CUNY) system. The employee alleged they faced unlawful discrimination in the workplace, though the specific details of what type of discrimination occurred are not available from the court records. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (10 of 14), Retaliation (9 of 14), Hostile Work Environment (6 of 14). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Retaliation and Hostile Work Environment.
Published opinions span New York. 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.
These published opinions sit within the education sector, where Title IX intersects with Title VII and tenure-revocation cases raise heightened procedural protections.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
13 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 1 summary-judgment opinions, 1 ended the case in City University of New York’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.
- 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 →
Claim Types
States
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 Education 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.