Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings
55 distinct federal cases coded as employment matters from public court records (2000–2026)
10 trusted published court opinions across 10 distinct cases · 10 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
In public federal court records, Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings is named as a defendant in 55 federal cases coded as employment matters between 2000 and 2026.
Of the 10 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 5 ended in a ruling for the employer, 2 had a mixed result, 2 were sent back to a lower court, and 1 was dismissed.
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Retaliation, and Breach Of Contract.
Cases were filed across 5 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 10 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings appears in 10 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Ruiz v. Laboratory Corporation of America (2024) — Dismissed. 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.
KOVALEV v. LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA (2022) — Defendant Win. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (6 of 10), Retaliation (5 of 10), Breach of Contract (4 of 10). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Retaliation and Breach of Contract.
Published opinions span California (3), Illinois (1), Pennsylvania (1), North Carolina (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, Illinois rulings, Pennsylvania rulings and North Carolina 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
10 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 3 summary-judgment opinions, 2 ended the case in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings’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.
- Motion to dismiss
- An early request — usually by the employer — to throw the case out before any evidence is gathered.
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
26 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.
- Employee v. Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings D/B/A Laboratory Corporation of AmericaTex. App.—1st Dist. · 2024
- Employee v. Laboratory Corporation of America HoldingsD.D.C. · 2024 · District of Columbia
- Employee v. Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings4th Circuit · 2024
- Employee v. Laboratory Corporation of America HoldingsS.D. Cal. · 2021 · California
- Employee v. FUSION DIAGNOSTICS LABORATORIES, LLC, ETC. (L-1952-15, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)NJSUPERCTAPPDIV · 2020
- Employee v. Labcorp, Laboratory Corp. of AmericaD.D.C. · 2018 · District of Columbia
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of AmericaD.D.C. · 2017 · District of Columbia
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings2nd Circuit · 2016
- Employee v. Laboratory Corporation of America11th Circuit · 2014
- Employee v. Laboratory Corporation of AmericaD.D.C. · 2013 · District of Columbia
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings4th Circuit · 2013
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of AmericaOKLA · 2011
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of AmericaD. Nev. · 2011 · Nevada
- Employee v. Metabolite Laboratories, Inc.Federal Circuit · 2010
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of America3rd Circuit · 2009
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of American HoldingsArk. Ct. App. · 2008
- Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. EmployeeM.D.N.C. · 2006 · North Carolina
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of AmericaMass. App. Ct. · 2006
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of America5th Circuit · 2005
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of AmericaTex. App.—5th Dist. · 2004
- Employee v. Laboratory Corp. of AmericaKy. Ct. App. · 2004
- Employee v. Dr. Bill Sledge, Mary Bankhead, M.D., and Laboratory Corporation of AmericaTex. App.—7th Dist. · 2003
- Employee v. Dr. Bill Sledge, Mary Bankhead, M.D., and Laboratory Corporation of AmericaTex. App.—7th Dist. · 2003
- Employee v. Dr. Bill Sledge, Mary Bankhead, M.D., and Laboratory Corporation of AmericaTex. App.—7th Dist. · 2003
- United States ex rel. Clausen v. Laboratory Corp. of America, Inc.N.D. Ga. · 2000 · Georgia
- Employee v. LOUISIANA STATE EMPLOYEES'GROUPLa. Ct. App. · 2000
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.