Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 392 F.3d 478 - Haynes v. Williams

Haynes v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

392 F.3d 478 · 2004

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
September 2018
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 48 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Karen Sutton Kimberly Hintons v. United Air Lines Inc · Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams · Bragdon v. Abbott

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

  1. “If the impact of an impairment can be eliminated by changing the address at which an individual works, that impairment is neither permanent nor long term.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “an `impairment’s impact must ... be permanent or long term.’”
    1 later decision 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.