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.
2,409 merit decisions (labor courts)
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
- —76 of 331 judges meet the sample threshold
76 of 331 judges meet the sample threshold
Topics range from 40% to 80%.
Base: 2,409 merit decisions from real cases (labor courts). Rate = granted + partial over merit-decided.
Public, aggregated, anonymized.
Jurimetrics comes from public sources of the Regional Labor Courts, aggregated and anonymized. The company's internal data enters only its own isolated instance — never the public jurimetrics.
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