Contrera v. Langer’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956) · 29 U.S.C. § 216 · 29 U.S.C. § 255 · 29 U.S.C. § 256
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Thomas v. Arn · Cortec Industries, Inc. v. Sum Holding L.P. · Brass v. American Film Technologies, 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the complaint. Chen v. Major League Baseball Props., Inc. , 798 F.3d 72 , 81 (2d Cir. 2015) (An affirmative defense”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Contrera v. Langer
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.