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.
380544 CANADA, INC. v. Aspen Technology, Inc.
Meacham
Adams
LEFEVRE
Adamo
Adamo
Simmons
Simmons
Finkelshteyn
Kendall
Brown
Ziegler
Ziegler
Krish
Stagehands Referral Service, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board
Stagehands Referral Service, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Nichols Gas & Oil, Inc.
Albertson Water District v. Amerada Hess Corp.
Daines
National Labor Relations Board v. Yale New Haven Hospital
National Labor Relations Board v. Yale New Haven Hospital
United States Ex Rel. Anti-Discrimination Center of Metro New York, Inc. v. Westchester County
Stanhope
Stanhope
National Labor Relations Board v. Igramo Enterprise, Inc.
National Labor Relations Board v. Igramo Enterprise, Inc.
T.P. & S.P. Ex Rel. S.P. v. Mamaroneck Union Free School District
T.P.
Guideone Specialty Mutual Insurance v. Congregation Adas Yereim
In Re Novartis Wage and Hour Litigation
Lorge School v. National Labor Relations Board
Lorge School v. National Labor Relations Board
Meacham
Meacham
Public Employees Retirement Ass'n v. Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP
Public Employees Retirement Ass'n v. Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP
Church Homes, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
Church Homes, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
National Labor Relations Board v. 675 West End Owners Corp.
National Labor Relations Board v. 675 West End Owners Corp.
Patrickson
Patrickson
Roessner
Paulino
Fortune
City of Pontiac General Employees' Retirement System v. MBIA Inc.
National Labor Relations Board v. Atlantic Paratrans of N.Y.C., Inc.
Illiano
Dixon
Cibao Meat Products, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
Showing 3,501–3,550 of 4,502 rulings · Page 71 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.