Employment Rulings in the Eleventh Circuit
The Eleventh Circuit covers the federal courts in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia. The rulings below come from the circuit's court of appeals and the federal trial courts within it.
Of the 729 published rulings we track here (1974–2026), 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 729 published rulings we track in the Eleventh 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 726 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 165 summary-judgment rulings here, 128 ended the case in the employer’s favor and 37 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 Eleventh Circuit covers.
Recent Rulings in the Eleventh Circuit
Heritage Corp. of S. Fla. v. NAT. UNION FIRE INS.
Crenshaw
Erickson v. United States Department of Labor
Kari A. Schabo v. Gov't Employees Insurance Co.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Comcast of Georgia, Inc.
National Labor Relations Board v. U.S. Postal Service
Guzman
National Labor Relations Board v. Goya Foods
Corstiaan A. Kok v. Kadant Black Clawson, Inc.
Patterson
McNa
Richardson v. Jackson
Shivers v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union 349
Neal Everett Nicarry v. Michael Cannaday
Heritage Corp. of S. Fla. v. National Union Fire
Midlothian Laboratories, LLC v. PAMLAB, LLC
Dale M. Thompson v. William W. Adamson
Schena v. Metropolitan Life Retirement Plan for United States Employees
Henry E. Adams v. Cobb County School District
Thomas
Monaco v. Tanning Research Laboratories, Inc.
Armitage
John Acevedo v. First Union Nat'l Bank
Ross
Calvert
Tom McAdams v. Francis J. Harvey
Schweers
Adam Elend v. Sun Dome, Inc.
Badier
Jarvy Arlex Posada-Lopez v. U.S. Atty. General
David King v. Nation Union Fire Insurance Co.
Redner
Edgar Hernando Rodriguez Posada v. U.S. Atty. Gen.
Lamb
Novella
Samuel Adam Bush v. Washington Mutual
Juan Jorge Moncada Restrepo v. U.S. Atty. Gen.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Cagle's, Inc.
Sherk
National Labor Relations Board v. Chugach Management Services, Inc.
Vickery
Bartlett
Brandon
Dail
Triangle Construction & Maintenance Corp. v. Our Virgin Islands Labor Union
Employers Mutual Casualty Co. v. All Seasons Window & Door Manufacturing, Inc.
Moore
Diego Aristizabal Estrada v. U.S. Attorney General
Tom McAdams v. Francis J. Harvey
Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees v. CSX Transportation, Inc.
Showing 551–600 of 729 rulings · Page 12 of 15
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.