7,250 employment law court rulings from public federal records (1863–2026)
Wrongful termination claims arise when an employee is fired in violation of federal or state law, public policy, or an employment contract. While most employment is at-will, employers cannot terminate employees for illegal reasons such as discrimination, retaliation, or exercising legal rights. These cases examine whether the stated reason for termination was pretextual.
Employers most frequently appearing in wrongful termination rulings.
ADA, termination
Summary judgment Civ.R. 56 wrongful termination gender R.C. 4112.99. The court determined that plaintiff provided no direct evidence of discrimination, and did not plead in her complaint or otherwise provide evidence that she was replaced by a non-protected individual. Finally, plaintiff failed to demonstrate that a similarly-situated person was treated differently than she was. Summary judgment granted in favor of defendant.
This appeal involves the termination of a firefighter's employment with the City of Memphis. The firefighter appealed his termination to the City of Memphis Civil Service Commission. He also filed a lawsuit in federal district court asserting various causes of action against the City of Memphis and other defendants. After a six-day jury trial in federal court, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants. The City of Memphis then sought dismissal of the firefighter's appeal before the Civil Service Commission based on the principles of res judicata and/or collateral estoppel. The Civil Service Commission granted the motion and dismissed the appeal. The firefighter then sought review in chancery court, and the chancery court upheld the decision of the Civil Service Commission. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.
State employee with work-related driving privileges did not have his ability to perform his job impaired, especially when his job entailed minimal driving. Further, employee's application for FMLA leave for three months should have been granted. Summary judgment for the Ohio Department of Transportation in ensuing lawsuit was not appropriate.
In a consolidated administrative appeal of an employer's liability and contribution rate determination under Ohio unemployment compensation laws, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting an attorney for the Ohio Department of Job & Family Services ("ODJFS") to offer testimony describing exhibits which were supported by affidavits of ODJFS officials. The trial court did not commit reversible error in indicating that the employer failed to dispute factual findings where the trial court ultimately addressed that issue. Judgment affirmed.
Showing 3,401–3,450 of 7,250 rulings · Page 69 of 145
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.