City and County of San Francisco
19 federal employment cases from public court records (2001–2025)
19 with a published ruling
What public court records show
Public federal court records list City and County of San Francisco as an employer in 19 employment matters between 2001 and 2025.
Of the 19 matters with a recorded outcome, the most common were: 8 ended in a ruling for the employer, 5 had a mixed result, 4 ended in a ruling for the worker, and 2 settled.
Workers obtained a favorable ruling in about 21% of matters with a recorded outcome.
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Wage Theft, and Failure To Accommodate.
Cases were filed across 4 states, most often in CA.
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.
Does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.
AI-extracted from court records; figures may be amounts at issue, not amounts paid. Not a finding of liability.
About this employer
City and County of San Francisco appears in 19 federal employment-law court rulings on record. These cases sit within the public sector, where due-process protections, First Amendment retaliation, and union-related (NLRA / state PERB) claims apply. 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 (7 of 19), Wage Theft (4 of 19), Failure to Accommodate (3 of 19). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Wage Theft and Failure to Accommodate.
Rulings span California (9), New York (2), Texas (1), Michigan (1). California 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. California rulings, New York rulings, Texas rulings and Michigan rulings.
Case Outcomes
Case Stages
The stage at which courts issued City and County of San Francisco’s 17 stage-identified rulings.
Of the 2 summary-judgment rulings, 0 ended the case in City and County of San Francisco’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.
- Motion to dismiss
- An early request — usually by the employer — to throw the case out before any evidence is gathered.
- 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.
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
Federal cases
public court recordsOne row per case · a badge means the case reached a published ruling · plaintiff names redacted
Other Government & Public Sector employers
Browse rulings 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.