Rivera-Cotto v. Rivera’s Empirical Analysis
38 F.3d 611 · 1994
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 43 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Santa Padilla-Garcia v. Jose Guillermo Rodriguez Municipality of Mayaguez (2000), González-de-Blasini v. Family Department (2004)
20 federal appellate · 43 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Branti v. Finkel · Medina-Munoz v. Rj Reynolds Tobacco Company · Johnson v. Brown · Correa-Martinez v. Arrillaga-Belendez
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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[e]ven in cases where elusive concepts such as motive and intent are at issue, summary judgment may be appropriate if the non-moving party rests merely upon conclusory allegations, improbable inferences, and unsupported speculation.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“by pointing to evidence in the record which, if credited, would permit a rational fact finder to conclude that the challenged personnel action occurred and stemmed from a politically based discriminatory animus.... Without more, a nonmoving plaintiff-employee's unsupported and speculative assertions regarding political discrimination will not be enough to survive summary judgment.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Larou v. Ridlon · Barry v. Moran“if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.