Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 462 F. Supp. 2d 581 - Lipscomb v. Electronic Data Systems Corp.

462 F. Supp. 2d 581 - Lipscomb v. Electronic Data Systems Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
July 2014
most recently cited

2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 2601 · 29 U.S.C. § 2601 (§ 2 of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993) · 29 U.S.C. § 2612 (§ 102 of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993) · 29 U.S.C. § 2613 (§ 103 of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993) · 29 U.S.C. § 2615 (§ 105 of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993)

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Monge v. California

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

  1. “In order for retaliatory conduct to rise to the level of an adverse employment action under Title VII, it “must be serious and tangible enough to alter an employee’s compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment .... ” Robinson v. City of Pittsburgh, 120 F.3d 1286, 1300-01 (3d Cir.1997). “An adverse employment action necessarily encompasses all tangible employment actions such as ‘hiring, firing, failing to promote, reassignment or a decision causing a significant change in benefits.’ ” Sher-rod v. Phila., Gas Works, 57 Fed. Appx. 68, 74-74 , 2003 WL 230709 , (3d Cir.2003) (citing Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 , 118 S.Ct. 2257 , 141 L.Ed.2d 633 (1998)); see also Abramson v. William Paterson Coll., 260 F.3d 265, 288 (3d Cir. 2001) (finding termination of employment is clearly an adverse employment action).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “factfinder could reasonably either (1) disbelieve the employer's articulated legitimate reasons; or (2) believe that an invidious discriminatory reason was more likely than not a motivating or determinative cause of the employer's action.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “After establishing a prima facie case, the burden shifts to the employer to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its adverse employment action.”
    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.