The Washington Post
7 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2000–2013)
6 trusted published court opinions across 6 distinct cases
What public court records show
Public federal court records list The Washington Post as an employer in 7 distinct federal employment cases between 2000 and 2013.
Of the 6 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 4 ended in a ruling for the worker, 1 ended in a ruling for the employer, and 1 were sent back to a lower court.
The most common claims on record were Breach Of Contract, Wage Theft, and Wrongful Termination.
Cases were filed across 1 state (DC).
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 6 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
The Washington Post appears in 6 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Washington Mailers Union Local M-29 v. Washington Post (2010) — Plaintiff Win. This case involved a dispute over whether a union could challenge an employee's firing after their contract had expired. The Washington Mailers Union argued that even though their 1998 collective bargaining agreement had ended, they still had the right to fight the termination of a worker who had a lifetime job guarant… Read the ruling.
Washington Post v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services (2003) — Plaintiff Win. An employee named Malik suffered work injuries in 1999 and 2000 while working for The Washington Post. The newspaper made payments to Malik but claimed they were settling the case under Virginia law. Malik disagreed and sought workers' compensation benefits from the District of Columbia instead. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Breach of Contract (2 of 6), Wage Theft, Wrongful Termination. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Breach of Contract, Wage Theft and Wrongful Termination.
Published opinions span District of Columbia. District of Columbia 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. District of Columbia rulings.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
6 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 2 summary-judgment opinions, 0 ended the case in The Washington Post’s favor and 2 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.
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
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 employers with published opinions
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.