Matrix Employee Leasing
5 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2008–2017)
5 trusted published court opinions across 5 distinct cases
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Matrix Employee Leasing as an employer in 5 distinct federal employment cases between 2008 and 2017.
Of the 5 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 3 ended in a ruling for the employer and 2 ended in a ruling for the worker.
The most common claims on record were Wage Theft and Failure To Accommodate.
Cases were filed across 1 state (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
Matrix Employee Leasing appears in 5 trusted published federal employment opinions. The most recent written decision on record:
Matrix Employee Leasing v. Hernandez (2008) — Plaintiff Win. This case involved a worker named Hernandez who was injured on the job while employed by Matrix Employee Leasing. When Hernandez filed for workers' compensation benefits, the employer argued that he should not receive benefits because he had provided a false social security card when he was hired. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Wage Theft, Failure to Accommodate. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Wage Theft and Failure to Accommodate.
Published opinions span Florida. 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.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
5 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.
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
States
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.