Skip to main content
Finance

Quicken Loans, Inc.

5 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (20102019)

1 trusted published court opinion across 1 distinct case

What public court records show

Public federal court records list Quicken Loans, Inc. as an employer in 5 distinct federal employment cases between 2010 and 2019.

The most common claims on record were Retaliation.

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.

1
Published Opinions Analyzed

Written decisions across 1 distinct case.

Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

About this employer

Quicken Loans, Inc. appears in one trusted published federal employment opinion:

Quicken Loans, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board (2016) — Defendant Win. Read the ruling.

The published opinion involves a retaliation claim. Browse other retaliation rulings for comparable fact patterns and how courts have ruled. Retaliation.

Applicable statutes referenced across these rulings include: NLRA (29 U.S.C. §§ 151-169) — The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects the rights of employees to organize, form or join labor unions, bargain collectively through representatives of their choosing, and engage in other concerted activities for mutual aid or protection. See the NLRA reference page for filing deadlines, employee thresholds, and remedies. NLRA.

This published opinion sits within the financial services sector, where Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank whistleblower protections often supplement standard Title VII claims.

Claim Types

Retaliation
1 (100%)

Related Laws

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 records

One row per court+docket case · written opinions stay grouped inside their case · plaintiff names redacted

Employee v. QUICKEN LOANS INC
E.D. Mich. · Oct 2019
Docket closed
Quicken Loans, Inc. v. Employee
D.C. Circuit · Jul 2016 · Retaliation
Defendant Win
Employee v. Quicken Loans, Inc.
E.D. Mich. · Apr 2016
Docket closed
Employee v. Quicken Loans, Inc.
E.D. Mich. · Oct 2010
Docket closed
Employee v. Quicken Loans Inc.
E.D. Mich. · May 2010
Docket closed
Showing 5 of 5

Understand your employment rights

Free, private, no sign-up required.

Check My Rights

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.