Hearst Communications, Inc.
18 federal employment cases from public court records (1944–2025)
12 with a published ruling · 6 open dockets
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Hearst Communications, Inc. as an employer in 18 employment matters between 1944 and 2025.
Of the 12 matters with a recorded outcome, the most common were: 5 ended in a ruling for the employer, 5 ended in a ruling for the worker, 1 settled, and 1 had a mixed result.
Workers obtained a favorable ruling in about 42% of matters with a recorded outcome.
The most common claims on record were Harassment, Discrimination, and Retaliation.
Cases were filed across 7 states, most often in NY.
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.
About this employer
Hearst Communications, Inc. appears in 12 federal employment-law court rulings on record. These cases sit within the media sector, where First Amendment intersections, NLRA concerted-activity, and retaliation claims tied to editorial roles appear. 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 Harassment (2 of 12), Discrimination (2 of 12), Retaliation (2 of 12). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Harassment, Discrimination and Retaliation.
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. See the NLRA reference page for filing deadlines, employee thresholds, and remedies. NLRA.
Rulings span New York (3), California (2), Texas (1), Illinois (1). New York 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 York rulings, California rulings, Texas rulings and Illinois rulings.
Case Outcomes
Case Stages
The stage at which courts issued Hearst Communications, Inc.’s 12 stage-identified rulings.
Of the 3 summary-judgment rulings, 2 ended the case in Hearst Communications, Inc.’s favor and 1 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.
- 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.
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 Media & Entertainment 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.