Kansas State University
6 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2011–2021)
3 trusted published court opinions across 3 distinct cases
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Kansas State University as an employer in 6 distinct federal employment cases between 2011 and 2021.
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Retaliation, and Wrongful Termination.
Cases were filed across 1 state (KS).
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 3 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Kansas State University appears in 3 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Das v. Kansas State University (2021) — Defendant Win. This case involved a dispute between an employee named Das and Kansas State University over alleged disability discrimination in the workplace. Das claimed that the university violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which protects workers with disabilities from unfair treatment on the job. Read the ruling.
Shahmaleki v. Kansas State University (2015) — Defendant Win. A former employee sued Kansas State University, claiming they were fired based on their national origin and that the university retaliated against them for complaining. The employee also alleged the university violated their constitutional rights by treating them unfairly. Read the ruling.
Heublein v. WEFALD (2011) — Dismissed. A former Kansas State University employee named Heublein sued the university, claiming she was fired in retaliation for speaking up about problems, that the university broke an employment contract, and that she was terminated wrongfully. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination, Retaliation, Wrongful Termination. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Retaliation and Wrongful Termination.
Published opinions span Kansas. Kansas 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. Kansas rulings.
These published opinions sit within the education sector, where Title IX intersects with Title VII and tenure-revocation cases raise heightened procedural protections.
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.