Transunion
8 distinct federal cases coded as employment matters from public court records (2005–2023)
2 trusted published court opinions across 2 distinct cases
What public court records show
In public federal court records, Transunion is named as a defendant in 8 federal cases coded as employment matters between 2005 and 2023.
The most common claims on record were Failure To Accommodate.
Cases were filed across 2 states, most often in NH.
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
Transunion appears in 2 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Cornock v. Trans Union LLC (2009) — Defendant Win. Cornock sued his employer Trans Union LLC over a credit report dispute. He claimed the company failed to accommodate him properly, though the specific details of the accommodation request aren't clear from the available information. Read the ruling.
Anderson v. Trans Union (2005) — Defendant Win. This case involved a dispute between an employee named Anderson and Trans Union, a major credit reporting company. Anderson claimed that Trans Union failed to properly accommodate their needs, though the specific details of the accommodation request are not clear from the available information. Read the ruling.
The published opinion involves a failure to accommodate claim. Browse other failure to accommodate rulings for comparable fact patterns and how courts have ruled. Failure to Accommodate.
Published opinions span New Hampshire (1), Wisconsin (1). New Hampshire 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 Hampshire rulings and Wisconsin 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 court records naming this party
39 published opinions name this party but are not coded with an employment claim. Some are labor, unemployment or workers’ compensation matters whose claim type was not recorded; others are not employment disputes at all. They are not counted in any figure on this page, and no outcome is shown for them.
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLCE.D. Mich. · 2025 · Michigan
- Employee v. TransUnionE.D.N.Y. · 2024 · New York
- Employee v. TransUnionD. Nev. · 2024 · Nevada
- Employee v. Trans Union LLCFederal Circuit · 2022
- Employee v. TRANS UNION, LLCE.D. Pa. · 2022 · Pennsylvania
- Employee v. Transunion Credit BureauE.D.N.Y. · 2022 · New York
- Employee v. TransunionN.D. Okla. · 2022 · Oklahoma
- Employee v. Transunion9th Circuit · 2020
- Employee v. TransUnion LLC7th Circuit · 2020
- Employee v. TransUnion LLC7th Circuit · 2020
- Employee v. TransUnion LLC7th Circuit · 2020
- Employee v. Transunion LLC3rd Circuit · 2019
- Employee v. Transunion LLC11th Circuit · 2017
- Transunion Risk and Alternative Data Solutions, Inc. v. Employee11th Circuit · 2017
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLC6th Circuit · 2016
- Employee v. Transunion2nd Circuit · 2016
- Employee v. TransUnion2nd Circuit · 2016
- Employee v. Trans Union9th Circuit · 2015
- TransUnion Risk & Alternative Data Solutions, Inc. v. Employee11th Circuit · 2015
- TransUnion Risk and Alternative Data Solutions, Inc. v. Employee11th Circuit · 2015
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLC10th Circuit · 2013
- Trans Union LLC v. Employee2nd Circuit · 2010
- Employee v. Trans Union LLC4th Circuit · 2010
- Employee v. Trans Union LLC4th Circuit · 2010 · Virginia
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLCE.D. Va. · 2009 · Virginia
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLCD.N.H. · 2009 · New Hampshire
- Employee v. Trans Union LLC1st Circuit · 2008
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLC7th Circuit · 2007
- Employee v. Trans Union Corporation, a Delaware Corporation7th Circuit · 2007
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLCN.D. Ill. · 2006 · Illinois
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLCN.D. Ill. · 2005 · Illinois
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLC7th Circuit · 2005
- Employee v. Trans Union, L.L.C., Docket No. 04-1386-Cv2nd Circuit · 2005
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLC6th Circuit · 2004
- Employee v. Trans Union, LLCE.D. Pa. · 2003 · Pennsylvania
- Employee v. Trans Union6th Circuit · 2003
- Employee v. Trans Union Corp5th Circuit · 2001
- Employee v. Trans Union, L.L.C.N.D. Ala. · 2000 · Alabama
- Employee v. Trans Union L.L.C.C.D. Ill. · 2000 · Illinois
Other employers with published opinions
Browse trusted published opinions involving other employers.
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.