The Third Circuit covers the federal courts in Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The rulings below come from the circuit's court of appeals and the federal trial courts within it.
Of the 1,773 published rulings we track here (1973–2026), the breakdowns below show how they were decided. They describe published opinions only — not the odds of any particular situation.
Of the 1,773 published rulings we track in the Third Circuit.
A workplace lawsuit moves through stages, and a ruling can end it at any of them. Here is where the 1,760 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 433 summary-judgment rulings here, 244 ended the case in the employer’s favor and 188 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 Third Circuit covers.
WILMOTH
BEVERLY
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. BAYADA HOME HEALTH CARE, INC.
WHITNEY
WINBUSH
IN RE QUEST DIAGNOSTICS ERISA LITIGATION
LUCIANO
MARTONE
Garland Adams v. Correctional Emergency Respons
STEIN
PLUMBERS LOCAL UNION NO. 24 PENSION FUND v. GRACE PLUMBING & HEATING, LLC
TRUSTEES OF INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PAINTERS AND ALLIED TRADES DISTRICT COUNCIL 711 HEALTH & WELFARE FUND v. LJL WINDOWS, INC.
Williams v. CARSON CONCRETE CORPORATION
John Sweeney v. Alcon Laboratories
MARSHALL
HARNER
OJEDA V. LOUIS BERGER GROUP (DOMESTIC), INC.
MCCAFFERTY
SCALIA
EDWARDS
BECK
Woods
BLAZEVICH
SAECHOW
RESCO PRODUCTS, INC. v. INTERNATIONAL UNION OF BRICKLAYERS AND ALLIED CRAFTWORKERS
RUFFING
RAGUSA
UTILITY SYSTEMS, INC. v. INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 825 AFL-CIO
TRUSTEES OF INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PAINTERS AND ALLIED TRADES DISTRICT COUNCIL 711 HEALTH & WELFARE FUND v. NEWAGE PAINTING CORPORATION
ADAMS
NOWAK
ADAMS
DOYLE
BRUNO
ABRAHAM
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 542 v. Mallinckrodt ARD, Inc. f/k/a Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
LOGAN
Boley
MAMMEN, M.D., M.P.H. v. THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY
LABORERS' COMBINED FUNDS OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA v. CONCRETE CORING COMPANY, INC.
TITO
Locke
JOSEPH D. ALKON v. CIGNA HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
HUGLER
RUDOLPH
Casale
KASTEN
AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION LOCAL 85 v. PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY
THE JAMES MONROE CONDOMINIUM AT NEWPORT, INC. v. SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 32BJ
McCullough
Showing 701–750 of 1,773 rulings · Page 15 of 36
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.