Skip to main content
Claim Type

Retaliation Cases

3,992 employment law court rulings from public federal records (1964–2026)

3,992
Total Rulings
19%
Plaintiff Win Rate

689 of 3680 adjudicated opinions ended in a plaintiff win.

$1,019,496
Avg Damages Awarded (213 prevailing cases)
D.C. Circuit
Top Court

About Retaliation Claims

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.

Case Outcomes

Defendant Win
1889 (47%)
Plaintiff Win
689 (17%)
Mixed Result
652 (16%)
Dismissed
450 (11%)
Remanded
274 (7%)
Settlement
38 (1%)

Top Employers in Retaliation Cases

Employers most frequently appearing in retaliation rulings.

Union Pacific Railroad Company
32 retaliation rulings
United States Postal Service
22 retaliation rulings
Abbott Laboratories
22 retaliation rulings
New York State Department of Labor
17 retaliation rulings
Amazon.com Services LLC
10 retaliation rulings

Court Rulings (3,992)

Byrne
Unknown CourtMay 16, 1988New Jersey

T was discharged from her employment with company G in the midst of an investigation by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) into sex-based wage disparity in one of the departments of the company. T was not employed in that department, but was perceived by G as having played a…

Settlement$20,000 awarded
Jesse A. Tolbert v. Jesse A. Vidaurri and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
6th CircuitMar 8, 1988Michigan
Defendant Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Star Tool & Die Works, Inc.
E.D. Mich.Dec 17, 1987Michigan
Defendant Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. United States Steel Corp.
W.D. Pa.Oct 1, 1987Pennsylvania
Plaintiff Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. FLC & Bros. Rebel, Inc.
W.D. Va.Jun 29, 1987Virginia
Plaintiff Win$14,250 awarded
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Goodyear Aerospace Corporation
9th CircuitApr 7, 1987California
Mixed Result
National Labor Relations Board v. North American Van Lines, Inc.
INNDJun 18, 1985Indiana
Defendant Win
Villarreal v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
8th CircuitMay 21, 1985Missouri
Defendant Win
Metropolitan Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations Board
U.S. Supreme CourtApr 4, 1983Pennsylvania
Defendant Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Joseph Paper Co.
W.D. Tenn.Feb 18, 1983Tennessee
Plaintiff Win
Samuel T. ROBINO, Appellant, v. Eleanor Holmes NORTON, Chair, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Appellee
8th CircuitJul 2, 1982Missouri
Defendant Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Shoney's, Inc.
N.D. Ala.Jan 27, 1982Alabama
Defendant Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Union Camp Corp.
W.D. Mich.Jan 5, 1982Michigan
Defendant Win$23,973.75 at issue
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bay Shipbuilding Corp.
E.D. Wis.Dec 19, 1979Wisconsin
Defendant Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bronson Methodist Hospital
W.D. Mich.Nov 7, 1979Michigan
Plaintiff Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Fry-Wagner Moving & Storage Co.
E.D. Mo.Feb 27, 1979Missouri
Defendant Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Lockheed Electronics Co.
S.D. Tex.Nov 20, 1978Texas
Defendant Win
Berio
D.D.C.Feb 28, 1978District of Columbia
Defendant Win
Iron Workers
U.S. Supreme CourtJan 17, 1978
Defendant Win
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Appellant, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Appellee
4th CircuitJan 22, 1976Virginia
Plaintiff Win
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Rinella & Rinella
N.D. Ill.Jul 22, 1975Illinois
Plaintiff Win
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HUTTIG SASH & DOOR COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee
5th CircuitApr 10, 1975Alabama
Plaintiff Win
Food Store Employees
U.S. Supreme CourtMay 20, 1974West Virginia
Defendant Win
Nueces County Hospital District v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Unknown CourtFeb 26, 1974
Defendant Win
Planting
IdahoJun 27, 1973Idaho
Plaintiff Win
Scrivener
U.S. Supreme CourtFeb 23, 1972Missouri
Plaintiff Win
Marine Workers
U.S. Supreme CourtMay 27, 1968
Plaintiff Win
National Labor Relations Board v. Erie Resistor Corp.
U.S. Supreme CourtMay 13, 1963Pennsylvania
Plaintiff Win
Washington Aluminum
U.S. Supreme CourtMay 28, 1962Maryland
Plaintiff Win
Walton Mfg
U.S. Supreme CourtApr 9, 1962
Remanded
National Labor Relations Board v. United Aircraft Corp.
D. Conn.Dec 15, 1961Connecticut
Plaintiff Win
Mastro Plastics Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board
U.S. Supreme CourtJun 11, 1956New York
Plaintiff Win
Electrical Workers
U.S. Supreme CourtDec 14, 1953North Carolina
Defendant Win
Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board
U.S. Supreme CourtFeb 26, 1951New York
Remanded
Republic Aviation Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board
U.S. Supreme CourtApr 23, 1945New York
Plaintiff Win
Southport Petroleum Co. v. National Labor Relations Board
U.S. Supreme CourtFeb 16, 1942Texas
Plaintiff Win
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board
U.S. Supreme CourtApr 28, 1941Arizona
Plaintiff Win
Republic Steel Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board
U.S. Supreme CourtNov 12, 1940
Mixed Result
Fain-Blatt
U.S. Supreme CourtApr 17, 1939New Jersey
Plaintiff Win
National Labor Relations Board v. Sands Manufacturing Co.
U.S. Supreme CourtFeb 27, 1939Ohio
Defendant Win
Con Ed v. NLRB
U.S. Supreme CourtDec 5, 1938New York
Mixed Result
Associated Press v. National Labor Relations Board
U.S. Supreme CourtApr 12, 1937New York
Plaintiff Win

Think you may have a retaliation 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.