Diamond Resorts International Marketing, Inc.
11 distinct federal cases coded as employment matters from public court records (2012–2021)
3 trusted published court opinions across 2 distinct cases
What public court records show
In public federal court records, Diamond Resorts International Marketing, Inc. is named as a defendant in 11 federal cases coded as employment matters between 2012 and 2021.
The most common claims on record were Wage Theft.
Cases were filed across 1 state (NV).
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 2 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Diamond Resorts International Marketing, Inc. appears in 3 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Delara v. Diamond Resorts International Marketing, Inc. (2021) — Mixed Result. An employee named Delara sued Diamond Resorts International Marketing for wage theft—essentially not paying required wages. The company argued it should be exempt from certain wage laws that apply to retail and service workers. The company also claimed it acted in good faith and shouldn't owe extra damages. Read the ruling.
Gonzalez v. Diamond Resorts International Marketing, Inc. (2021) — Defendant Win. Workers employed by Diamond Resorts International Marketing, Inc. filed a lawsuit claiming the company improperly withheld their wages. The employees had signed arbitration agreements when they were hired—documents requiring them to settle disputes through private arbitration rather than court. Read the ruling.
Gonzalez v. Diamond Resorts International Marketing, Inc. (2019) — Plaintiff Win. Sales representatives at Diamond Resorts, working as vacation counselors, claimed their employer was breaking federal wage laws. Specifically, they alleged the company calculated overtime pay incorrectly by excluding bonuses and commissions from the pay amount used to determine overtime rates. Read the ruling.
The published opinion involves a wage theft claim. Browse other wage theft rulings for comparable fact patterns and how courts have ruled. Wage Theft.
Published opinions span Nevada. Nevada 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. Nevada rulings.
These published opinions sit within the hospitality sector, where wage theft, tip-pooling violations, and sexual-harassment claims are common.
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 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.