The D.C. Circuit covers the federal courts in the District of Columbia. The rulings below come from the circuit's court of appeals and the federal trial courts within it.
Of the 1,408 published rulings we track here (1973–2026), the breakdowns below show how they were decided. They describe published opinions only — not the odds of any particular situation.
Of the 1,408 published rulings we track in the D.C. Circuit.
A workplace lawsuit moves through stages, and a ruling can end it at any of them. Here is where the 1,403 rulings we could classify by stage were decided.
A higher court reviewing an earlier decision. Many published opinions come from this stage, after a lot has already happened in the case.
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.
Of the 200 summary-judgment rulings here, 102 ended the case in the employer’s favor and 98 let the worker’s claims continue.
An early request — usually by the employer — to throw the case out before any evidence is gathered.
A judge or jury heard the evidence and reached a decision. Relatively few disputes get this far.
The two sides resolved the dispute by agreement, sometimes with court approval. Most settlements are private and never show up in published opinions.
A decision entered because one side did not respond to the case at all.
Procedural decisions and orders that do not fit the main stages above.
Browse rulings from courts in each state the D.C. Circuit covers.
Tabaee v. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Fosque v. District of Columbia Housing Authority
Searcy v. Vilsack
Johnson v. Georgetown University
Donner v. Fox News Network, LLC
Orozco v. Bondi
Lucas v. Casillas Guzman
Ajisafe v. Government of the District of Columbia
Service Employees International Union National Industry Pension Fund v. Hamilton Park Opco, LLC
Juselis
Lemu v. Factory Mutual Insurance Company
Parada Orellana v. Hann's Harvard, Inc.
Rivas v. United American Security, LLC
Pressley v. Management Support Technology, Inc.
Reddish v. Washington Metro Area Transit Authority
Service Employees International Union National Industry Pension Fund v. Vistacare LLC
Kideckel
CenturyTel of Montana, Inc. v. NLRB
Bangura v. Vita Surgical Group, LLC
Zaid v. Executive Office of the President
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Camden Development, Inc.
National Treasury Employees Union v. Russell T. Vought
American Federation of Government Employees v. U.S. Department of Education
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Security Assurance Management, Inc.
Adams
Employee 1 v. Barbara Bazron
NLRB v. Rafael Ortiz
NLRB v. Governed United Security Professionals
Adaeze Nwosu v. Dabney Friedrich
Eugene Hudson, Jr. v. American Federation of Government Employees
Adan
An opinion was released in case 23-1281, VTCU Corp. v. NLRB
Sanders
An opinion was released in case 23-1237, Acumen Capital Partners, LLC v. NLRB
Metrohealth Inc. v. NLRB
Vhs Acquisition Subsidiary Number 7, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
Cat-El
The Healing Healthcare 3, Inc. v. NLRB
Vhs Acquisition Subsidiary Number 7, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
Vhs Acquisition Subsidiary Number 7, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
NLRB v. Omni Excavators, Inc. (JUDGMENT ENFORCING AN ORDER)
Absolute Healthcare v. NLRB
Madaket LLC v. Sweet Grace Distilling Company LLC
WMATA
Justin Rueb v. Secretary of Labor
FLRA
CP Anchorage Hotel 2, LLC v. NLRB
Starbucks Corporation v. NLRB
Cadillac of Naperville, Inc. v. NLRB
American Medical Response of Connecticut, Inc. v. NLRB
Showing 51–100 of 1,408 rulings · Page 2 of 29
Explore employment rulings from the other federal circuits.
These figures summarize publicly available published court opinions only. Published opinions over-represent summary-judgment rulings (decisions made without a trial) and appeals, because those are the stages where judges most often write formal opinions. Most workplace disputes settle privately and never appear here at all. A ruling’s outcome reflects many case-specific factors and is not a prediction for any other situation. Read more about how we source and classify rulings.
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 classification of outcomes and case stages is based on automated analysis and may not reflect the full scope of each case.