Finch v. Hercules Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district ·

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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]he existence of a body outside the plaintiffs work unit which had approval power over his termination precludes a limitation of discovery to the individual work unit. However, this conclusion does not justify extending discovery beyond information which pertains to the [reviewing] Committee or the local work unit. The only discovery outside the local work unit which is relevant to plaintiffs claim is the discovery pertaining directly to the activities of the Committee which performed its function nationwide.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Kresefky v. Panasonic Communications & Systems Co.

2. “If plaintiff can show a trend of age discrimination in the two years prior to his own dismissal, a similar showing for the four previous years will not add to the evidence. On the other hand, if plaintiff can only show a pattern of discrimination between 1985 and 1989, but not 1989 to 1991, any weak inference that plaintiff was discriminated against in 1991 does not warrant subjecting defendant to the necessity of searching its records for the period 1985 to 1989.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Kresefky v. Panasonic Communications & Systems Co.