Phillips v. Heydt’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the substance of the allegations, rather than specific language of the pleadings, to determine if a plaintiff has properly invoked the doctrine”). . In Plaintiff’s deposition, Plaintiff elaborates on the allegation that Defendant’s employees made fun of him because of his disability and age. Plaintiff states that the employees”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.