Jurimetrics that holds up.
Measuring, over real and public labor-court decisions, how often each claim is granted — by topic, court, jurisdiction and judge. With honest method and the sample in plain sight.
14k cases · nationwide
The number only counts if the math is honest.
On the merits, not the dismissal
The rate counts only what was decided on the merits — granted, partial or denied. Dismissals without merit are excluded; we don't inflate the number.
Real decisions, not headnotes
We read each claim's outcome in the decision, reconciled claim by claim. Not generic case law, not opinion.
Only where there's a base
Court and judge get a profile only with a sufficient sample. Where there's no base, we don't assert — we flag low confidence.
Four grains, from topic to judge.
Topic
Pattern by claim type — overtime, vacation, moral damages.
Court
Behavior of the unit where the case runs.
Jurisdiction
The set of courts in a region.
Judge
Individual profile and deviation from the pool.
The same claim, different judges, different outcomes.
Around a pool of ~36% grant rate, judges with a sufficient sample range from −36 to +64 percentage points. Ignoring that is defending in the dark.
- —Grant rate vs. the pool, with the deviation
- —Defensibility by judge and by court
- —approximately 400 judges meet the sample threshold
approximately 400 judges meet the sample threshold
Topics range from 40% to 80%.
Base: 14k+ real cases, nationwide, totaling ~62k merit decisions. Rate = granted + partial over merit-decided.
The base is public. Your number is yours.
The grant pattern is the starting point — what the courts do in general. Your case's probability emerges when that base is cross-checked with your evidence on that claimant.
And the claimant is almost always a former employee: you hold their full record — payroll, timesheets, eSocial, PPE log, termination. Each claim is checked against your evidence. Overtime granted 56% in the pool? With your sound time records, it drops to 28% — in your case. This cross-check runs inside your isolated instance and refines only your number.
Public, aggregated, anonymized.
The collective jurimetrics comes from public sources of the Regional Labor Courts, aggregated and anonymized — it's the base rate. Your internal data never enters that collective layer: it works on your side, in your isolated instance, refining your case's probability. The boundary is strict and one-way — your data helps you, without ever feeding the collective.
Glossary: jurimetrics · grant pattern.
See the jurimetrics applied to your caseload.
A demo with the grant pattern of your courts and judges.
Book a demo