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
Wanda L. Adams v. Florida Power Corporation
Seals
Alpert
Demyan
Collis
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Joe's Stone Crab, Inc.
Edwards
NLRB v. LAMPI LLC
National Labor Relations Board v. Lampi LLC
Chilton
Thomas H. Yochum v. Barnett Banks, Inc. Severance Pay Plan, Employee Benefits Committee of the Barnett Banks, Inc. Severance Pay Plan
Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, International
Wales
United States ex rel. Clausen v. Laboratory Corp. of America, Inc.
Adams v. Thiokol Corporation
Watkins
James F. Adams v. Thiokol Corporation
Crawford
United Food & Commercial Workers Unions, Employers Health & Welfare Fund v. Philip Morris, Inc.
Lyons v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. Salaried Employees Retirement Plan
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Total System Services, Inc.
EEOC v. Total System Services, Inc.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Joe's Stone Crab, Inc.
EEOC v. Joe's Stone Crabs, Inc.
Harris
Addison
Eugene Telfair v. First Union Mortgage Corp
Eugene Telfair v. First Union Mortgage Corp
National Abortion Federation v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority
United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. W&O, Inc.
U.S. EEOC v. W & O, Inc.
U.S. EEOC v. W & O, Inc.
Sammons
Moghadam
Rousselle
Sorrells
Allen
Cooper/T. Smith, Inc. v. NLRB
Hill
Kendall
Sampson
Phillips
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Complete Dewatering, Inc.
NLRB v. McClain of Georgia, Inc.
Paleologos
Green
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Phillips Colleges, Inc.
Allen
McCoy
Ferrill
Showing 651–700 of 729 rulings · Page 14 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.