Employment Rulings in the Eighth Circuit
The Eighth Circuit covers the federal courts in Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The rulings below come from the circuit's court of appeals and the federal trial courts within it.
Of the 1,462 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.
How These Rulings Ended
Of the 1,462 published rulings we track in the Eighth Circuit.
What Happens at Each Stage
A workplace lawsuit moves through stages, and a ruling can end it at any of them. Here is where the 1,452 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 310 summary-judgment rulings here, 196 ended the case in the employer’s favor and 114 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.
Top Claim Types
States in This Circuit
Browse rulings from courts in each state the Eighth Circuit covers.
Recent Rulings in the Eighth Circuit
Laborers-Employers Pension Trust v. Panera Bread
Haviland
Holschen
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Schwan's Home Service
National Labor Relations Board v. Fortune Bay Resort Casino
Hopkins
Rodgers
Fields
Grobe
Rodney Cook v. Union Pacific RR Co.
Mahony
Hunter Levi v. United States Dept of Labor
Smith v. Local Union No. 110, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Bevill v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
Qwest Corporation v. Anne Boyle
Burch v. Qwest Communications International, Inc.
American Cleaners & Laundry Co. v. Textile Processors, Service Trades, Health Care, Professional & Technical Employees International Union Local 161
Cintas Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board
Cintas Corporation v. NLRB
Thompson
Alan Thompson v. United Transportation Union
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Hibbing Taconite Co.
Myers v. CROELL REDI-MIX, INC.
Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.
Jack Gross v. FBL Financial Services
Richard Adams v. Eureka Fire Protection Dstr.
McAdams
Joseph McAdams v. Moore Stephens Frost, PLC
Clausen
Willie Watson v. Neighbors Credit Union
Lee v. Nucor-Yamato Steel Co.
Fenton v. Farmers Insurance Exchange
Onyiah v. St. Cloud State University
Bishop
Union Electric Co. v. James Devine
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Siouxland Oral Maxillofacial Surgery Associates, L.L.P.
McPhetridge v. IBEW, Local Union No. 53
National Labor Relations Board v. John T. Jones Construction Co.
Pandey
Luiken v. Domino's Pizza, LLC
Burks
Timothy Merriam v. Natl. Union Fire Ins. Co.
Hogan v. United Parcel Service
Roach Manufacturing Corp. v. Northstar Industries, Inc.
International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America v. Rousselot, Inc.
Donnelly
Michael McKinzy, Sr. v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
McKINZY
Beatty
Miner
Showing 851–900 of 1,462 rulings · Page 18 of 30
Browse Other Circuits
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.