6,927 employment law court rulings from public federal records (1964–2026)
958 of 6484 adjudicated opinions ended in a plaintiff win.
Retaliation occurs when an employer takes adverse action against an employee for engaging in legally protected activity, such as filing a discrimination complaint, reporting safety violations, or participating in an investigation. Retaliation is the most commonly filed charge with the EEOC. These cases examine whether a causal connection exists between the protected activity and the adverse employment action.
Employers most frequently appearing in retaliation rulings.
defamation, malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress, whistleblower, R.C. 4113.52, statutory immunity, R.C. 2744.03, motion for summary judgment, genuine issue of material fact
Motion to compel arbitration contract contractual capacity ratification R.C. 2711.02. The trial court did not err in granting appellees' motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration. The record reflects that a valid and enforceable arbitration agreement existed because it had been ratified by…
Trial court did not err by affirming SPBR decision that terminated employee was protected by whistleblower statute and that whistleblower activity motivated the termination because trial court could find there was reliable, probative, and substantial evidence to support conclusion that employee had…
Trial court did not err in providing jury instruction requested by appellees, nor did court err in ruling on appellant's request to pursue a claim for retaliation in age discrimination action.
Showing 3,601–3,650 of 6,927 rulings · Page 73 of 139
Explore rulings by type of employment law claim.
Check which employment laws may protect you — free, private, and no sign-up required.
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 claim types is based on automated analysis and may not reflect the full scope of each case.