Solomon v. Vilsack’s Empirical Analysis
628 F.3d 555 · 2010
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 12 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 633A (§ 15 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 701 (Employment Opportunities for Individuals With Disabilities Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 791 · 29 U.S.C. § 794A · 42 U.S.C. § 12111 (§ 101 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (§ 102 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12203 (§ 503 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White · Auer v. Robbins · State of New Hampshire v. State of Maine
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.
“Lacking the benefit of the [trial] court's analysis of whether genuine issues of material fact exist that would preclude the entry of summary judgment, we believe the most prudent course is to remand for the [trial] court to consider this issue in the first instance.”
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.