Fairley v. Andrews’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1985 · 42 U.S.C. § 1986
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Connick v. Myers · Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A. · National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Morgan
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“while some of the allegedly retaliatory conduct- assigning double-duty shifts, denying paternity leave, investigations of misconduct-were routine, everyday decisions, the alleged agreement to harass and retaliate against Plaintiffs cannot be similarly described.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Plaintiffs did not allege a conspiracy to assign double-shifts, but a conspiracy to deprive them of their First Amendment rights.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“We fail to comprehend how agreeing to harass and retaliate against employees is within the scope of Defendants' employment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.