Sonntag v. Shaw’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 30 district · 33 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]his Court has acknowledged the possibility of individual liability for discrimination claims. Cf. Luboyeski v. Hill , 117 N.M. 380 , 382, 872 P.2d 353 , 355 (1994) (affirming the dismissal of individual defendants because the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies against them); Mitchell-Carr v. McLendon , 1999-NMSC-025 , ¶ 10, 127 N.M. 282 , 980 P.2d 65 (citing Luboyeski ). As Plaintiff suggests, the potential for individual liability for discrimination claims is rooted in the language of the NMHRA itself, which forbids "any person" from supporting a discriminatory practice. Section 28-1-7(i) ; see N.M.S.A. 1978, § 28-1-2(A) (1993)(including within its definition of "person" for purposes of the NMHRA, "one or more individuals").”

   8 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Benavidez v. Sandia National Laboratories · Gerald v. Locksley

2. “If instructions, considered as a whole, fairly present the issues and the law applicable thereto, they are sufficient. Denial of a requested instruction is not error where the instructions given adequately cover the issue.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Collins v. St. Vincent Hosp., Inc.

3. “We do not address [the appellant's] claim because he has failed to provide this Court with citations to relevant authority and has not argued this issue with sufficient particularity.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Ponce