G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc.
107 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2011–2024)
6 trusted published court opinions across 5 distinct cases
What public court records show
Public federal court records list G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. as an employer in 107 distinct federal employment cases between 2011 and 2024.
Of the 6 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 2 ended in a ruling for the employer, 2 settled, and 2 had a mixed result.
The most common claims on record were Wage Theft and Discrimination.
Cases were filed across 4 states, most often in FL.
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 5 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. appears in 6 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Shoults v. G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Incorporated (2020) — Mixed Result. A security officer named Shoults sued G4S Secure Solutions, claiming the company failed to pay wages properly under federal law. The worker wanted to represent a group of similarly situated security officers who may have experienced the same problem. Read the ruling.
Dennis v. G4S Secure Solutions (USA), Inc. (2020) — Defendant Win. Dennis filed a lawsuit against G4S Secure Solutions claiming unfair pay based on gender. The worker argued that male employees doing substantially the same job received higher wages. Dennis also raised a separate discrimination complaint. Read the ruling.
Garcia v. G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. (2019) — Settlement. Garcia filed a lawsuit against G4S Secure Solutions, claiming the company failed to pay him minimum wage and overtime pay as required by federal law. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Wage Theft (5 of 6), Discrimination. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Wage Theft and Discrimination.
Published opinions span Florida (2), Arizona (1), California (1), Tennessee (1). Florida 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. Florida rulings, Arizona rulings, California rulings and Tennessee rulings.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
6 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
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.
- 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
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.