Lurensky v. Wellinghoff’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 623 (§ 4 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 633 (§ 14 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 791 · 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Foman v. Davis · Haines v. Kerner · Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“could well dissuade a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brett v. Brennan“a significant change in employment status”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Brett v. Brennan
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.