Walmart Inc.
1,531 distinct federal cases coded as employment matters from public court records (1996–2026)
87 trusted published court opinions across 81 distinct cases · 116 docket-only cases without a recorded end date
What public court records show
In public federal court records, Walmart Inc. is named as a party in 1,531 federal cases coded as employment matters between 1996 and 2026.
Of the 83 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 36 ended in a ruling for the employer, 14 were dismissed, 12 ended in a ruling for the worker, and 12 were sent back to a lower court.
4 further opinions are listed below but left out of these outcome figures, because the employer brought the case or was not a party to it.
Plaintiffs won 12 of 71 adjudicated opinions (17%).
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Retaliation, and Failure To Accommodate.
Cases were filed across 24 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 81 distinct cases.
12 of 71 adjudicated opinions ended in a plaintiff win.
Does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.
Positive amounts in plaintiff-win, mixed-outcome, or settlement opinions only. AI-extracted; amounts may not equal money paid.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Walmart Inc. appears in 87 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Sharpe-Miller v. Walmart (2026) — Mixed Result. A Walmart employee filed a lawsuit claiming he faced unfair treatment based on his sexual orientation. He alleged he was demoted, fired, harassed, and forced to quit because of discrimination. He also claimed the company retaliated against him for complaining about hostile treatment at work. Read the ruling.
Elena Mukhina v. Walmart, Inc. (2025) — Defendant Win. Elena Mukhina filed a lawsuit against Walmart claiming she faced unfair treatment based on her national origin and religion. She also alleged the workplace was hostile toward her and that Walmart punished her for complaining about these issues. Read the ruling.
Lanyice Delay v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. et al. (2025) — Remanded. Lanyice Delay filed a lawsuit against Walmart, claiming she experienced harassment, a hostile work environment, and retaliation at her job. Walmart tried to move the case from California state court to federal court, arguing that the court system didn't have proper jurisdiction to hear it. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (50 of 87), Retaliation (37 of 87), Failure to Accommodate (36 of 87). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Retaliation and Failure to Accommodate.
Published opinions span California (13), Wisconsin (10), Florida (6), Arkansas (5). 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, Wisconsin rulings, Florida rulings and Arkansas rulings.
These published opinions sit within the retail sector, where wage-and-hour, scheduling, and Title VII harassment claims are the dominant categories.
Opinion Outcomes
4 listed opinions are not counted here: the employer brought the case, or was not a party to an appeal against an agency, so the recorded outcome is not a result for or against a worker.
Opinion Stages
81 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 20 summary-judgment opinions, 17 ended the case in Walmart Inc.’s favor and 3 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.
- Settlement / consent decree
- The two sides resolved the dispute by agreement, sometimes with court approval. Most settlements are private and never show up in published opinions.
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. Walmart Inc.C.D. Cal. · 2025 · California
- Employee v. Walmart Western UnionS.D. Cal. · 2023 · California
- Employee v. Walmart, Inc. and Adam BourgeoisLa. Ct. App. · 2021
- Employee v. WalmartW.D. Okla. · 2021 · Oklahoma
- Employee v. Wal-Mart Store, Inc.N.D. Cal. · 2021 · California
- Employee v. Walmart, Inc.N.D. Ill. · 2020 · Illinois
- Employee v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Store 542La. Ct. App. · 2019
- Secretary of Labor v. Walmart Stores East8th Circuit · 2019
- Employee v. Maine Employment CommissionMESUPERCT · 2016
- Walmart Stores, Inc. v. EmployeeCALCTAPP5D · 2016
- Employee v. United Food etc. UnionCal. Ct. App. · 2016
- Employee v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Md. Ct. Spec. App. · 2016
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. EmployeeCOLOCTAPP · 2016
- Employee v. Mississippi Department of Employment SecurityMISSCTAPP · 2014
- Employee v. Labor CommissionUtah Ct. App. · 2014 · Utah
- Employee v. Office of Employment SecurityLa. Ct. App. · 2014 · Louisiana
- Employee v. Virginia Employment CommissionVACTAPP · 2011
- Employee v. Mississippi Department of Employment SecurityMISSCTAPP · 2010
- Employee v. Mississippi Department of Employment SecurityMISSCTAPP · 2010
- Employee v. Department of Employment SecurityIll. App. Ct. · 2007
- Employee v. Department of Employment SecurityIll. App. Ct. · 2007
- Employee v. Mississippi Employment SEC. Com'nMISSCTAPP · 2007
- Employee v. Secretary of LaborD.C. Circuit · 2005
- Employee v. Rli Insurance Company8th Circuit · 2002
- Employee v. NAT. UNION FIRE INS. CO.MISSCTAPP · 2000
- Employee v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant-Appellant5th Circuit · 1995 · Texas
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.