Union Pacific Railroad Company
629 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (1996–2026)
668 trusted published court opinions analyzed; 662 map to 550 distinct cases · 5 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Union Pacific Railroad Company as an employer in 629 distinct federal employment cases between 1996 and 2026.
Of the 668 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 348 ended in a ruling for the employer, 106 ended in a ruling for the worker, 75 had a mixed result, and 69 were sent back to a lower court.
Plaintiffs won 106 of 596 adjudicated opinions (18%).
The most common claims on record were Wrongful Termination, Discrimination, and Failure To Accommodate.
Cases were filed across 25 states, most often in NE.
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 550 distinct cases.
106 of 596 adjudicated opinions ended in a plaintiff win.
Does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.
Positive amounts in plaintiff-win, mixed-outcome, or settlement opinions only. AI-extracted; amounts may not equal money paid.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Union Pacific Railroad Company appears in 668 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Vasquez v. Union Pacific Railroad (2025) — Defendant Win. This case involved a legal dispute between an employee named Vasquez and Union Pacific Railroad, one of the country's major freight railroad companies. The case was filed in federal court and dealt with employment law issues, though the specific details of what workplace problem triggered the lawsuit are not available… Read the ruling.
Adamson v. Union Pacific Railroad (2025) — Remanded. This case involved a dispute between a railway worker named Adamson and Union Pacific Railroad under the Railway Labor Act, which is a federal law that governs labor relations in the railroad and airline industries. Read the ruling.
Graves v. Union Pacific Railroad (2025) — Remanded. This case involved a dispute between an employee named Graves and Union Pacific Railroad under the Railway Labor Act, which is a federal law that governs labor relations in the railroad and airline industries. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Wrongful Termination (216 of 668), Discrimination (142 of 668), Failure to Accommodate (111 of 668). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Wrongful Termination, Discrimination and Failure to Accommodate.
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. ADA (42 U.S.C. §§ 12111-12117) — The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in all aspects of employment. See the NLRA, ADA reference pages for filing deadlines, employee thresholds, and remedies. NLRA and ADA.
Published opinions span Nebraska (89), Illinois (45), Texas (27), Missouri (27). Nebraska 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. Nebraska rulings, Illinois rulings, Texas rulings and Missouri rulings.
These published opinions sit within the transportation sector, where USERRA, FMLA, and DOT safety-retaliation claims appear alongside standard discrimination claims.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
667 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 136 summary-judgment opinions, 102 ended the case in Union Pacific Railroad Company’s favor and 34 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.
- 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.
- Settlement / consent decree
- The two sides resolved the dispute by agreement, sometimes with court approval. Most settlements are private and never show up in published opinions.
- Other rulings
- Procedural decisions and orders that do not fit the main stages above.
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 Transportation & Logistics 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.