Liberty Bank
5 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (1993–2026)
2 trusted published court opinions across 2 distinct cases · 1 docket-only case without a recorded end date
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Liberty Bank as an employer in 5 distinct federal employment cases between 1993 and 2026.
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Retaliation, and Breach Of Contract.
Cases were filed across 2 states, most often in IN.
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
Liberty Bank appears in 2 trusted published federal employment opinions. The most recent written decision on record:
Ernest L. Crady v. Liberty National Bank and Trust Company of Indiana, Steve Richards, Branch Administrator, and Jack Ragland, Chief Executive Officer (1993) — Defendant Win. Ernest Crady, a bank employee, sued Liberty National Bank and Trust Company of Indiana claiming he was not properly paid overtime under federal wage laws. Crady argued that the bank violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which requires most employers to pay workers time-and-a-half for hours worked beyond 40 in a… Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination, Retaliation, Breach of Contract. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Retaliation and Breach of Contract.
Published opinions span Indiana (1), Connecticut (1). Indiana 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. Indiana rulings and Connecticut rulings.
These published opinions sit within the financial services sector, where Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank whistleblower protections often supplement standard Title VII claims.
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.