Marrero-Gutierrez v. Molina’s Empirical Analysis
491 F.3d 1 · 2007
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 89 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 121 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Maymí v. Puerto Rico Ports Authority (2008), Morales-Tañon v. Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (2008)
17 federal appellate · 89 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
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill · Perry v. Sindermann · City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Carnegie-Mellon University v. Cohill
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 121 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As a general principle, section 1983 claims accrue 'when the plaintiff knows, or has reason to know, of the injury on which the action is based.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Due process requires only that the pretermination hearing fulfill the purpose of “an initial check against mistaken decisions-essentially, a determination of whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that the charges against the employee are true and support the proposed action.” Cepero-Rivera v. Fagundo, 414 F.3d 124, 135 (1st Cir.2005) (citing Cleveland Bd. Of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 545-546 , 105 S.Ct. 1487 , 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985)). This initial check requires the employee to receive notice of the charges, an explanation of the evidence that supports those charges, and the ability to refute that evidence. See id. at 134. Any standard that would require more process than this would unduly impede the government in removing poorly performing employees. See id. (Emphasis ours).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The standard of review of a motion for judgment on the pleadings under [Rule] 12(c) is the same as that for a motion to 2 We first discuss Ember and The Port's arguments on the rejection of the complaint and then their arguments on the denial of their request for leave to amend the complaint. - 9 - dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).”
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.