Skip to main content
Education

City University of New York

59 federal employment cases from public court records (19982026)

23 with a published ruling · 36 open dockets

What public court records show

Public federal court records list City University of New York as an employer in 59 employment matters between 1998 and 2026.

Of the 16 matters with a recorded outcome, the most common were: 5 ended in a ruling for the employer, 5 were dismissed, 3 ended in a ruling for the worker, and 3 had a mixed result.

Workers obtained a favorable ruling in about 19% of matters with a recorded outcome.

The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Retaliation, and Hostile Work Environment.

Cases were filed across 5 states, most often in NY.

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.

59
Federal Cases
19%
Plaintiff Win Rate

Does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.

5
States
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

About this employer

City University of New York appears in 16 federal employment-law court rulings on record. These cases sit within the education sector, where Title IX intersects with Title VII and tenure-revocation cases raise heightened procedural protections. The set below covers rulings that produced written federal-court decisions; private settlements, EEOC charges resolved without litigation, and state-court cases are not included.

The cases primarily involve Discrimination (13 of 16), Retaliation (9 of 16), Hostile Work Environment (7 of 16). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Retaliation and Hostile Work Environment.

Rulings span New York (10), Utah (1), New Hampshire (1), Massachusetts (1). New York 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. New York rulings, Utah rulings, New Hampshire rulings and Massachusetts rulings.

Case Outcomes

Defendant Win
5 (31%)
Dismissed
5 (31%)
Plaintiff Win
3 (19%)
Mixed Result
3 (19%)

Case Stages

The stage at which courts issued City University of New York’s 14 stage-identified rulings.

Appeal
4 (29%)
Summary judgment
1 (7%)

Of the 1 summary-judgment rulings, 1 ended the case in City University of New York’s favor and 0 let the worker’s claims continue.

Motion to dismiss
8 (57%)
Trial verdict
1 (7%)
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.
Motion to dismiss
An early request — usually by the employer — to throw the case out before any evidence is gathered.
Trial verdict
A judge or jury heard the evidence and reached a decision. Relatively few disputes get this far.

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 →

Federal cases

public court records

One row per case · a badge means the case reached a published ruling · plaintiff names redacted

Employee v. The City University of New York
S.D.N.Y. · Apr 2026
Open docket
Employee v. The City University of New York
E.D.N.Y. · Mar 2026
Open docket
Employee v. The City University of New York
S.D.N.Y. · Feb 2026
Open docket
Employee v. City University of New York
S.D.N.Y. · Jan 2026
Open docket
Employee v. The City University of New York
S.D.N.Y. · Nov 2025
Open docket
Employee v. The City University of New York - New York City College of Technology
S.D.N.Y. · Oct 2025
Open docket
Employee v. City University of New York (CUNY)
E.D.N.Y. · Sep 2025
Open docket
Employee v. City University of New York
E.D.N.Y. · Aug 2025
Open docket
Employee v. John Jay College of Criminal Justice
S.D.N.Y. · Jun 2025 · New York · Failure to Accommodate
Open docket
Employee v. City University of New York Queens College
E.D.N.Y. · May 2025
Open docket
Employee v. Marion, Kansas, City of Case Consolidated for Discovery; All Non-Dispositive filings to be made in Lead Case 23-cv-1179.
D. Kan. · Mar 2025 · New York · Discrimination
Defendant Win
Employee v. Chesler
D.N.H. · Mar 2025 · New Hampshire · Discrimination
Dismissed
Employee v. City University of New York
E.D.N.Y. · Mar 2025
Open docket
Employee v. Honeywell Retirement Earnings Plan
N.D. Ill. · Feb 2025 · Illinois · Discrimination
Dismissed
Employee v. Cottonwood Creek Agency
D. Utah · Feb 2025 · Utah · Discrimination
Mixed Result
Employee v. City University of New York
S.D.N.Y. · Jan 2025
Open docket
Employee v. Riverside Park Enterprises, Inc
D. Mass. · Jan 2025 · Massachusetts · Discrimination
Dismissed
Employee v. City University of New York
S.D.N.Y. · Dec 2024
Open docket
Employee v. City University of New York
S.D.N.Y. · Dec 2024
Open docket
Employee v. City University of New York
E.D.N.Y. · Oct 2024
Open docket
Employee v. City University of New York Research Foundation
E.D.N.Y. · Mar 2024
Open docket
Employee v. City University of New York
E.D.N.Y. · Oct 2023
Open docket
Employee v. City University of New York
S.D.N.Y. · Jun 2022 · New York · Discrimination
Plaintiff Win
Employee v. CUNY
S.D.N.Y. · Feb 2022 · New York · Discrimination
Dismissed
Employee v. City College of New York
S.D.N.Y. · Dec 2021 · New York · Discrimination
Open docket
Showing 25 of 59

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.