Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings
121 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2000–2026)
86 trusted published court opinions across 77 distinct cases · 10 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings as an employer in 121 distinct federal employment cases between 2000 and 2026.
Of the 86 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 38 ended in a ruling for the employer, 17 had a mixed result, 13 were dismissed, and 10 were sent back to a lower court.
Plaintiffs won 8 of 76 adjudicated opinions (11%).
The most common claims on record were Breach Of Contract, Discrimination, and Wrongful Termination.
Cases were filed across 16 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 77 distinct cases.
8 of 76 adjudicated opinions ended in a plaintiff win.
Does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings appears in 86 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Agustin Perez v. Laboratory Corporation of America (2025) — Plaintiff Win. This case involved Agustin Perez and his employer, Laboratory Corporation of America, a medical testing company. The dispute centered on employment law issues, though the specific details of what happened between Perez and his employer are not available in the court records. Read the ruling.
Ruiz v. Laboratory Corporation of America (2024) — Dismissed. This case involved a discrimination lawsuit filed by an employee named Ruiz against Laboratory Corporation of America, a major medical testing company. Ruiz claimed the company discriminated against them, though the specific details of what type of discrimination occurred are not available from the court records. Read the ruling.
Ashley Hershey v. Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (2024) — Remanded. Ashley Hershey filed a lawsuit against Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings and others, claiming she experienced discrimination and harassment at work. The company tried to move the case from California state court to federal court, arguing they had the right to do so. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Breach of Contract (27 of 86), Discrimination (13 of 86), Wrongful Termination (13 of 86). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Breach of Contract, Discrimination and Wrongful Termination.
Published opinions span California (9), North Carolina (7), District of Columbia (6), New York (3). 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, North Carolina rulings, District of Columbia rulings and New York rulings.
These published opinions sit within the healthcare sector, where employment disputes commonly involve HIPAA-adjacent retaliation, nursing-license issues, and accommodations under the ADA.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
86 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 13 summary-judgment opinions, 8 ended the case in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings’s favor and 5 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.
- Other rulings
- Procedural decisions and orders that do not fit the main stages above.
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 Healthcare employers
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.