Hewlett-Packard Co.
48 distinct federal cases coded as employment matters from public court records (2002–2024)
4 trusted published court opinions across 4 distinct cases · 1 docket-only case without a recorded end date
What public court records show
In public federal court records, Hewlett-Packard Co. is named as a defendant in 48 federal cases coded as employment matters between 2002 and 2024.
Across 4 trusted published opinions analyzed, recorded claim types include Discrimination, Retaliation, and Failure To Accommodate.
The analyzed published opinions with a recorded state span 2 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.
Written decisions across 4 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Hewlett-Packard Co. appears in 4 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Sangster v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (2024) — Defendant Win. A worker sued Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company, claiming gender discrimination and harassment on the job. The employee also alleged retaliation after reporting problems and that working conditions became so bad they had to quit (a claim called "constructive discharge"). Read the ruling.
Robert Sloat v. Hewlett-Packard Enter. Co. (2021) — Remanded. Robert Sloat sued Hewlett-Packard Enterprise, claiming he was fired because of his age and punished for complaining about age discrimination. The company argued the case should be dismissed without going to trial, and a lower court agreed, saying Sloat hadn't presented enough evidence to move forward. Read the ruling.
Lamantia v. Hewlett-Packard Co. Employee Benefits Organization Income Protection Plan (2008) — Defendant Win. Lamantia filed a claim for long-term disability benefits through Hewlett-Packard's employee benefit plan. When the plan denied his request, he sued, arguing the company failed to properly accommodate his situation and made an unfair decision about his eligibility for benefits. Read the ruling.
Across 4 trusted published opinions analyzed, recorded claim types include Discrimination, Retaliation, Failure to Accommodate. Browse the linked claim hubs for other published opinions involving these claim types. Discrimination, Retaliation and Failure to Accommodate.
Published opinions span California (2), Tennessee (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 and Tennessee rulings.
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 and docket; written opinions stay grouped inside their case. List captions may abbreviate names; public records and case details can identify the parties.
Other court records naming this party
1 published opinion names this party but is 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.