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
Wayne Yarian v. All Freight Carriers, Inc.
Stewart
Armentrout
Munger
Laborers' International Union of North America, Local 169 v. The Penta Building Group, Inc.
Heyman
Carpenters Southwest Administrative Corporation v. J and R P Development Corp.
Tramon Wilson-Davis v. SSP America, Inc.
Swinton
Penning
Leon Belaustegui v. International Longshore and Warehouse Union
Osegueda
Peter Strojnik, Sr. v. 1309 West Shaw, LLC
Haley
Magnum Property Investments, LLC v. Jose M. Quezada
Miller-Garcia
Barajas-Quijada
Lea Wagenstein v. Cigna Life Ins. Co.
Regaspi
Kramlich
Robert Saavedra v. Volkswagen Aktengesellschaft
Eric Bahra v. County of San Bernardino
Clark v. Clark County Human Resorce Devision
Drevaleva
Guadalupe Bores v. Lime Crime, Inc.
Dunlap
Raquedan
Rafael Arroyo, Jr. v. Thrifty Payless, Inc.
Robson
Michael White v. Sr. Leaders Severance Pay Plan
Nelson Calzada v. William Barr
Adams
Hyams
Brown
Guadalupe Salazar v. McDonald's Corp.
Olga Gorbacheva v. Abbott Laboratories Edp
Foster
Yuriria Diaz v. Macys West Stores, Inc.
Yuriria Diaz v. Macys West Stores, Inc.
Mpoyo
Bradford v. Chevron USA Inc.
Frieri
Garretson
Oregon Laborers-Employers Health & Welfare Trust Fund v. Baseline Industrial Construction, Inc.
Olivo
De Leon v. Ricoh USA, Inc.
Ser Lao v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P.
Adam Acosta v. District Council 36 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO
Schwendeman
Gascon
Showing 1,051–1,100 of 1,784 rulings · Page 22 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.