Gustave-Schmidt v. Chao’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
239 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2679 · 28 U.S.C. § 2680 · 29 U.S.C. § 157 (§ 7 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 630 (§ 11 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 5 U.S.C. § 7121
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Edelman v. Jordan · Butz v. Economou · Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit · Cannon v. University of Chicago
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 265 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the facts alleged in the complaint, documents attached as exhibits or incorporated by reference in the complaint, and matters about which the Court may take judicial notice.”
21 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“unsupported by the facts set out in the complaint.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“) at 13, ECF No. 45-1. For simplicity's sake, the Court will recount the facts in Mr. Golden's Second Amended Complaint in this section, and will address MTC's contention that facts in his complaints are contradictory when it reviews MTC's argument that Mr. Golden has failed to plead a plausible inference of retaliation. See infra Section IV.A.2. In deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, a court may consider”
2 later decisions 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.