Employment Rulings in the First Circuit
The First Circuit covers the federal courts in Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Puerto Rico. The rulings below come from the circuit's court of appeals and the federal trial courts within it.
Of the 367 published rulings we track here (1983–2026), 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 367 published rulings we track in the First 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 361 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 72 summary-judgment rulings here, 48 ended the case in the employer’s favor and 24 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
Top Employers
- United States Postal Service4
- Raytheon Company4
- DCP Midstream, L.P.4
- The Wheatleigh Corporation3
- Abbott Laboratories, Inc.3
- Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada3
States in This Circuit
Browse rulings from courts in each state the First Circuit covers.
Recent Rulings in the First Circuit
Sullivan
Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc.
Mongue
GRIFFIN
Sheehan
O'Connell
Schara
Krua
Mongue
Harper
Clark v. Capital Vision Services, LLC
Munoz-Rosario
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Citizens Bank, N.A.
MAINEHEALTH
Together Employees v. Mass General Brigham Incorporated
NOLL
Lozada
BELL v. O'REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISES LLC
OKEREKE
Adams
Scalia
Pineda v. Skinner Services, Inc.
Together Employees v. Mass General Brigham Incorporated
U.S. Dep’t of Labor, Secretary of Labor v. P Unitil Service Corp.
Adams
Host
Trustees of the Sheet Metal Workers Local Union No. 17 Insurance Fund v. Phils HVAC, Inc.
United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO/CLC v. National Grid
Hatch
Rosado-Pagan
Rose
Paige
White
Rosario Ramos v. Municipality of Rio Grande
Gonzalez-Bermudez
Daniels
Ministeri
NLRB v. The Wang Theatre, Inc.
Laureano-Quinones
Beaupre
NLRB v. The Wang Theatre, Inc.
Modeski
Cervantes
Adames Casalduc v. Televicentro of Puerto Rico LLC
Rapuano
American Institute for Foreign Study, Inc. v. Fernandez Jimenez
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Aviation Port Services, LLC
Micheo-Acevedo
FAGRE
Furtado
Showing 51–100 of 367 rulings · Page 2 of 8
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.