Ramada Franchise Systems, Inc.
10 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2001–2020)
10 trusted published court opinions across 10 distinct cases
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Ramada Franchise Systems, Inc. as an employer in 10 distinct federal employment cases between 2001 and 2020.
Of the 10 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 4 ended in a ruling for the worker, 4 ended in a ruling for the employer, and 2 were dismissed.
Plaintiffs won 4 of 10 adjudicated opinions (40%).
The most common claims on record were Breach Of Contract, Discrimination, and Retaliation.
Cases were filed across 3 states, most often in MD.
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 10 distinct cases.
4 of 10 adjudicated opinions ended in a plaintiff win.
Does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Ramada Franchise Systems, Inc. appears in 10 trusted published federal employment opinions. The most recent written decision on record:
Brown v. Ramada Birmingham Airport (2020) — Plaintiff Win. This case involved a worker named Brown who filed a lawsuit against Ramada Birmingham Airport claiming employment discrimination and civil rights violations. The employee alleged they faced unfair treatment at work based on protected characteristics like race, gender, age, or other factors covered by civil rights laws. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Breach of Contract (5 of 10), Discrimination, Retaliation. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Breach of Contract, Discrimination and Retaliation.
Published opinions span Maryland (2), Ohio (1), Alabama (1). Maryland 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. Maryland rulings, Ohio rulings and Alabama rulings.
These published opinions sit within the hospitality sector, where wage theft, tip-pooling violations, and sexual-harassment claims are common.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
10 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 2 summary-judgment opinions, 2 ended the case in Ramada Franchise Systems, Inc.’s favor and 0 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.
- Trial verdict
- A judge or jury heard the evidence and reached a decision. Relatively few disputes get this far.
- Default judgment
- A decision entered because one side did not respond to the case at all.
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 Hospitality & Food Service 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.