323 F. Supp. 2d 267 - Rios v. Rumsfeld’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1981A · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 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) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Brown v. General Services Administration
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the presumption of discrimination drops out of the picture, the McDonnell Douglas framework with its presumptions and burdens disappears, and the sole remaining issue is of discrimination vel non.... Thus, the critical inquiry becomes whether the aggregate of evidence of pretext and retaliatory animus suffices to [persuade the fact finder],”
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.