The Second Circuit covers the federal courts in New York, Connecticut, and Vermont. The rulings below come from the circuit's court of appeals and the federal trial courts within it.
Of the 4,502 published rulings we track here (1964–2026), the breakdowns below show how they were decided. They describe published opinions only — not the odds of any particular situation.
Of the 4,502 published rulings we track in the Second Circuit.
A workplace lawsuit moves through stages, and a ruling can end it at any of them. Here is where the 4,367 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 807 summary-judgment rulings here, 484 ended the case in the employer’s favor and 322 let the worker’s claims continue; the rest resolved in other ways.
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.
Browse rulings from courts in each state the Second Circuit covers.
Ragusa
Mf
Incantalupo
Incantalupo
Public Employees' Retirement System v. Merrill Lynch & Co.
Does
Century Vertical Systems, Inc. v. Local No. 1, International Union of Elevator Constructors
International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers, AFL-CIO v. National Labor Relations Board
Adams
International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers, AFL-CIO v. National Labor Relations Board
Adams
Sullivan
Fort
Jackson v. NYS Department of Labor
Bey
Celeste
National Labor Relations Board v. Bloomfield Health Care Center
R.S.
Adams
City of Ann Arbor Employees' Retirement System v. Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust Inc.
Adams
Simpson
K.L.A.
Iovine
Hyek
Todaro
O'Hara
Missick
Maounis
Spadaro
Fox
Birch
Frank
U.S. Information Systems, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union Number 3
Service Employees International, Inc. v. Director, Office of Workers Compensation Program
R.R., D.R. on behalf of M.R. v. Scarsdale Union Free School District
Ward
Service Employees Int'l v. Workers Comp.
Davis Ex Rel. Cr v. Wappingers Central School
Avgerinos
National Labor Relations Board v. Matros Automated Electrical Construction Corp.
Disabled Patriots of America, Inc. v. Niagara Group Hotels, LLC
Mosby
Mosby
Mosby
St. Louis v. New York City Health & Hospital Corp.
JG
Anegada Master Fund, Ltd. v. PXRE Group Ltd.
Civil Service Employees Ass'n v. New York State Department of Parks, Recreation & Historic Preservation
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Nichols Gas & Oil, Inc.
Showing 3,351–3,400 of 4,502 rulings · Page 68 of 91
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.