Tygrett v. Washington’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 2 district ·

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

1. “No person shall receive a permanent appointment who has not served the required probationary period, but the service during probation shall be deemed to be service in the uniformed force if succeeded by a permanent appointment, and as such shall be included and counted in determining eligibility for advancement, promotion, retirement, and pension in accordance with existing law. If at any time during the period of probation, the conduct or capacity of the probationer is determined by the Commissioner of the District of Columbia, or his designated agent, to be unsatisfactory, the probationer shall be separated from the service after advance written notification of the reasons for and the effective date of the separation. The retention of the probationer in the service after satisfactory completion of the probationary period shall be equivalent to a permanent appointment therein.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. James R. Tygrett v. Walter E. Washington, Commissioner, District of Columbia

2. ““1. Pickering’s statements were not directed towards a person with whom he would normally be in contact in the course of his daily work as a teacher. 391 U.S. at 569-570 , 88 S.Ct. at 1735; “2. Thus there was not present any question of maintaining discipline by immediate superiors and harmony among co-workers. Id. at 570, 88 S.Ct. at 1735; “3. Pickering’s relationship with the Board of Education was not the kind of close working relationship for which it could be claimed that personal loyalty and confidence are essential. Id., 88 S.Ct. at 1735; “4. Pickering’s letter did not damage the professional reputation of the Board of Education and did not foment controversy and conflict among Pickering’s co-workers. Id., 88 S.Ct. at 1736.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 379 F. Supp. 353 - Magri v. Giarrusso

3. “[i]n the circumstances of this case, [appellant's] interest as a citizen in making such statements whether in public or in an interview with his superiors is outweighed by the interests of the police department where the department is judging the conduct and capacity of a probationary officer.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. James R. Tygrett v. Walter E. Washington, Commissioner, District of Columbia