Erisoty v. Merrow Machine Co.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 50 state decisions

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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]he plaintiff bears the initial burden of proving by the preponderance of the evidence a prima facie case of discrimination. . . In order to meet this burden, the plaintiff must present evidence that gives rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination . . . If the plaintiff meets this initial burden, the burden then shifts to the defendant to rebut the presumption of discrimination by producing evidence of a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its actions . . . If the defendant carries this burden of production, the presumption raised by the prima facie case is rebutted, and the factual inquiry proceeds to a new level of specificity . . . The plaintiff then must satisfy her burden of persuading the fact-finder that she was the victim of discrimination either directly by persuading the court [or jury] that a discriminatory reason more likely motivated the employer or indirectly by showing that the employer's proffered explanation is unworthy of credence.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 3722 - Frank's Supermarket v. Michaud, No. Cv95-0549356s (Apr. 22, 1996) · 1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 12569 - Grabbert v. General Dynamics Corporation, No. 520612 (Dec. 12, 1994)

2. “(a) No employer who is subject to the provisions of this chapter shall discharge, or cause to be discharged, or in any manner discriminate against any employee because the employee has filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits or otherwise exercised the rights afforded to him pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. (b) Any employee who is so discharged or discriminated against may either: (1) Bring a civil action in the superior court for the judicial district where the employer has its principal office for the reinstatement of his previous job, payment of back wages and reestablishment of CT Page 4687 employee benefits to which he would have otherwise been entitled if he had not been discriminated against or discharged and any other damages caused by such discrimination or discharge. The court may also award punitive damages. Any employee who prevails in such a civil action shall be awarded reasonable attorney's fees and costs to be taxed by the court; or (2) file a complaint with the chairman of the workers' compensation commission alleging violation of the provisions of subsection (a) of this section. Upon receipt of any such complaint, the chairman shall select a commissioner to hear the complaint, provided any commissioner who has previously rendered any decision concerning the claim shall be excluded. The hearing shall be held in the workers' compensation district where the employer has its principal office. After the hearing, the commissioner shall send each”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Fortier v. C M Technology, Inc., No. 99233 (May 4, 1995) · 1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 3303 - Rancourt v. City of Meriden, No. Cv94-0245150s (Apr. 26, 1996)

3. “Section 31-290a does not require an employer to retain an employee unable to perform his or her work simply because that inability resulted from a work-related injury. . . .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Baillargeon v. First Union National Bank, No. Cv98-0262723-S (May 3, 2001) · Schrimp v. Bozzuto's, No. Cv-96-0392667s (Sep. 11, 1998)