State Bar of Nevada
16 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2002–2021)
18 trusted published court opinions across 16 distinct cases
What public court records show
Public federal court records list State Bar of Nevada as an employer in 16 distinct federal employment cases between 2002 and 2021.
Of the 18 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 9 ended in a ruling for the employer, 3 ended in a ruling for the worker, 3 were dismissed, and 2 had a mixed result.
Plaintiffs won 3 of 17 adjudicated opinions (18%).
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Retaliation, and Breach Of Contract.
Cases were filed across 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 16 distinct cases.
3 of 17 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
State Bar of Nevada appears in 18 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Eastman v. State Bar of California (2021) — Dismissed. An employee sued the State Bar of California claiming workplace discrimination and civil rights violations. The worker, Eastman, alleged that the State Bar had treated them unfairly based on discrimination, though the specific details of the alleged discriminatory conduct were not provided in the available case summary… Read the ruling.
Padam Khanna v. Baljit Randhawa (2010) — Defendant Win. Padam Khanna, an attorney, sued Baljit Randhawa claiming there was a conspiracy to take away his law license in retaliation for something he did. Khanna filed his case under a federal law that allows people to sue when they believe government officials violated their civil rights. Read the ruling.
Kingstad v. State Bar of Wisconsin (2009) — Defendant Win. Kingstad filed a lawsuit against the State Bar of Wisconsin, claiming the organization violated his rights by forcing him to pay mandatory dues that funded public image advertising. He believed being required to contribute money to this advertising campaign was unfair and violated his constitutional protections. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (2 of 18), Retaliation. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination and Retaliation.
Published opinions span California (2), Wisconsin (2). 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 Wisconsin rulings.
These published opinions sit within the legal sector, where partnership-track discrimination and bar-related retaliation claims raise unique issues.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
18 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.
- Motion to dismiss
- An early request — usually by the employer — to throw the case out before any evidence is gathered.
- 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 Legal Services 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.