576 F. Supp. 2d 72 - Williams v. Dodaro’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
21 district ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Conley v. Gibson
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“letter [that] did not indicate that it was a reprimand, ... was not placed in [the plaintiff’s] personnel file, and ... did not lead to any disciplinary action .... did not alter any of the conditions of [the plaintiff’s] employment such that it would dissuade a reasonable employee from filing a discrimination complaint”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the fact that [plaintiff] describe[s] h[is] allegations with greater specificity in these proceedings does not establish that [ ]he failed adequately to present them at the administrative level.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Documents filed by an employee with the EEOC should be construed, to the extent consistent with permissible rules of interpretation, to protect the employee's rights and statutory remedies.”
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.