CRST Van Expedited, Inc.
24 distinct federal cases coded as employment matters from public court records (2009–2025)
7 trusted published court opinions across 6 distinct cases · 1 docket-only case without a recorded end date
What public court records show
In public federal court records, CRST Van Expedited, Inc. is named as a party in 24 federal cases coded as employment matters between 2009 and 2025.
Of the 6 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 2 ended in a ruling for the worker, 2 ended in a ruling for the employer, 1 was dismissed, and 1 had a mixed result.
1 further opinion is 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, Harassment, and Wage Theft.
Cases were filed across 2 states, most often in IA.
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
CRST Van Expedited, Inc. appears in 7 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Cervantes v. CRST International, Inc. (2020) — Dismissed. A worker named Cervantes sued CRST International, claiming the company wrongfully fired them and failed to pay proper wages. The employee argued they were misclassified as an independent contractor when they should have been classified as a regular employee. Read the ruling.
EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc. (2019) — Defendant Win. This case involved a legal dispute between the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and CRST Van Expedited, a trucking company. The EEOC, which enforces federal anti-discrimination laws, had filed a lawsuit against the company on behalf of workers who allegedly faced workplace discrimination or harassment. Read the ruling.
Montoya v. CRST Expedited, Inc. (2019) — Plaintiff Win. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (4 of 7), Harassment (3 of 7), Wage Theft (3 of 7). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Harassment and Wage Theft.
Published opinions span Iowa (4), Massachusetts (3). Iowa 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. Iowa rulings and Massachusetts rulings.
These published opinions sit within the transportation sector, where USERRA, FMLA, and DOT safety-retaliation claims appear alongside standard discrimination claims.
Opinion Outcomes
1 listed opinion is 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
5 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 1 summary-judgment opinions, 0 ended the case in CRST Van Expedited, Inc.’s favor and 1 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 court records naming this party
1 published opinion names this party but is 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.
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.