Employment Rulings in the Ninth Circuit
The Ninth Circuit covers the federal courts in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. The rulings below come from the circuit's court of appeals and the federal trial courts within it.
Of the 1,784 published rulings we track here (1976–2026), 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 1,784 published rulings we track in the Ninth 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 1,750 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 174 summary-judgment rulings here, 108 ended the case in the employer’s favor and 66 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
States in This Circuit
Browse rulings from courts in each state the Ninth Circuit covers.
Recent Rulings in the Ninth Circuit
French
Rutherford
McHenry
DeCosta
Arakji
Martin
Fulkerson
Brooke
Newell
Trustees of the U.A. Union Local No. 290 Plumber, Steamfitter and Shipfitter Industry Pension Trust v. Puddletown Plumbing LLC
Bowman
Camilo
United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC v. Vista Metals Corporation
Wise
Tapley
Deng
Williams v. U.S. Airways American Airlines, Inc.
Merritt
(PS) Charles v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Holmes
Hernandez
Gutierrez Negrete v. Commercial Roofing Solutions Inc.
Ormeno
Board of Trustees of the Employee Painters' Trust v. D Ciulla Flooring LLC
Mitchell v. Nye County, Nevada
Wonderful Real Estate Development LLC v. Laborers International Union of North America Local 220
Moreno
Adams
Silverio Nevarez v. Costco Wholesale Corporation
757bd, LLC v. Natl Union Fire Ins. of Pitts.
Crane
Harris
Manuel Franco v. Central Transport LLC
(PS) Chavez v. Del Sol Farm Labor Services Inc.
Coleman-Fire
Edmond Neal v. 3179 Los Feliz Partners LLC
Stahl
National Union Fire Ins. v. Zillow, Inc.
Guadalupe Beltran v. Procare Pharmacy LLC
Norsoph
Spikes
Hill
Barajas-Quijada
Stephanie Patton v. Forest Laboratories, Inc.
Brown
Simmons
Alabsi
Flores
Howard Abselet v. Hudson Labor Solutions, Inc.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Herb Hallman Chevrolet d/b/a Champion Chevrolet
Showing 1,001–1,050 of 1,784 rulings · Page 21 of 36
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.