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
Eugene Herring v. Canada Life
Gardner
Gary A. Davolt v. The Executive Committee of O'Reilly Automotive, as Trustee and Plan Administrator of the O'Reilly Automotive Employee Health Plan
Lovett v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Entergy Services, Inc. v. Union Pacific Railroad
McMackins
National Labor Relations Board v. Monson Trucking, Inc.
NLRB v. Monson Trucking
COMMERCIAL UNION ASSURANCE v. Hartford Fire Ins.
Phillips
Wright Electric, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
Willa Jari Lovett v. Union Pacific RR
Wright Electric v. NLRB
Dakota Underground, Inc. v. Secretary of Labor
Dakota Underground v. Secretary of Labor
Adair
William Smith, by and Through His Parent and Legal Guardian, Ada Townsend v. Special School District, No. 1, Minneapolis)
McKenzie Engineering v. NLRB
NLRB v. MDI Commercial
NLRB v. Waymouth Farms
Bailiff
Mace
Hartig
Luckett
McGraw
Herndon
Jacobsen
EEOC v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.
Gary A. Bloom v. NLRB
Edwards
Miles
Johnson Brothers v. NLRB
EEOC v. Danka Industries, Inc.
21 Employee Benefits Cas. 1794, Pens. Plan Guide (Cch) P 23937p John Hill v. At&t Corporation
Pace Industries, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
Noble
Eye
EEOC v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.
EEOC v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Hi 40 Corp.
Engstrand
Calloway
SHARP/NLRB
Michael Aucutt v. Six Flags Over Mid-America, Inc., a Missouri Corporation in Good Standing, Equal Employment Advisory Council, Amicus Curiae
Johnson v. Metropolitan Sewer Dist.
Siemers
Reich v. Avoca Motel
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. USEEOC
Vankempen
James O. Vaughns v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Evan J. Kemp, Jr., Chairman
Showing 1,351–1,400 of 1,462 rulings · Page 28 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.