CVS Health Corporation
259 distinct federal cases coded as employment matters from public court records (2010–2026)
11 trusted published court opinions across 11 distinct cases · 16 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
In public federal court records, CVS Health Corporation is named as a defendant in 259 federal cases coded as employment matters between 2010 and 2026.
Of the 11 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 6 ended in a ruling for the employer, 2 ended in a ruling for the worker, 1 settled, and 1 was dismissed.
The most common claims on record were Retaliation, Discrimination, and Wage Theft.
Cases were filed across 5 states, most often in IL.
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 11 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
CVS Health Corporation appears in 11 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Soltis v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (2025) — Settlement. Read the ruling.
Rivas v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (2025) — Defendant Win. Rivas worked at CVS Pharmacy and filed a lawsuit claiming the company fired her in retaliation for reporting problems, withheld wages owed to her, and wrongfully terminated her employment. Read the ruling.
Osorio v. CVS Pharmacy (2023) — Dismissed. Osorio filed a lawsuit against CVS Pharmacy, claiming the company discriminated against him and wrongfully terminated his employment. He wanted the court to hear his case and award damages for what he said were illegal employment practices. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Retaliation (5 of 11), Discrimination (5 of 11), Wage Theft (4 of 11). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Retaliation, Discrimination and Wage Theft.
Published opinions span Illinois (3), California (3), Maryland (1), New York (1). Illinois 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. Illinois rulings, California rulings, Maryland rulings and New York rulings.
These published opinions sit within the retail sector, where wage-and-hour, scheduling, and Title VII harassment claims are the dominant categories.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
10 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 2 summary-judgment opinions, 2 ended the case in CVS Health Corporation’s favor and 0 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.
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
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
3 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.
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.