Skip to main content
Healthcare

Mercy Medical Center

9 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (20102025)

1 trusted published court opinion across 1 distinct case · 1 docket-only case without a recorded end date

What public court records show

Public federal court records list Mercy Medical Center as an employer in 9 distinct federal employment cases between 2010 and 2025.

The most common claims on record were Retaliation.

Cases were filed across 1 state (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.

1
Published Opinions Analyzed

Written decisions across 1 distinct case.

1
States

Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.

Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

About this employer

Mercy Medical Center appears in one trusted published federal employment opinion:

Offor v. Mercy Medical Center, Rockville Centre Division (2020) — Defendant Win. Offor filed a retaliation case against Mercy Medical Center, claiming the hospital punished her for taking leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). During the case, Offor's legal team asked the court to force New York Presbyterian Hospital to turn over her medical records from that facility. Read the ruling.

The published opinion involves a retaliation claim. Browse other retaliation rulings for comparable fact patterns and how courts have ruled. Retaliation.

The published opinion came from New York. New York is an EEOC deferral state, which extends the federal Title VII / ADA / ADEA filing deadline from 180 to 300 days. New York rulings.

This published opinion sits within the healthcare sector, where employment disputes commonly involve HIPAA-adjacent retaliation, nursing-license issues, and accommodations under the ADA.

Claim Types

Retaliation
1 (100%)

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 records

One row per court+docket case · written opinions stay grouped inside their case · plaintiff names redacted

Employee v. Mercy Medical Center
E.D.N.Y. · Apr 2025
Employee v. Mercy Medical Center
E.D.N.Y. · Dec 2022
Docket closed
Employee v. Mercy Medical Center, Rockville Centre Division
E.D.N.Y. · Jun 2020 · New York · Retaliation
Defendant Win
Employee v. Mercy Medical Center
N.D. Iowa · Jun 2018
Docket closed
Employee v. Mercy Medical Center
E.D.N.Y. · Apr 2016
Docket closed
Employee v. Mercy Medical Center
E.D.N.Y. · Sep 2015
Docket closed
Employee v. Mercy Medical Center
E.D.N.Y. · Sep 2014
Docket closed
Employee v. Mercy Medical Center
E.D.N.Y. · Dec 2013
Docket closed
Employee v. Mercy Medical Center Inc.
S.D. Iowa · Aug 2010
Docket closed
Showing 9 of 9

Understand your employment rights

Free, private, no sign-up required.

Check My Rights

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.