Riley v. Vilsack’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 623 (§ 4 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 633A (§ 15 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 791 · 29 U.S.C. § 794A · 2 U.S.C. § 1311 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Conley v. Gibson · Hishon v. King & Spalding
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]f all the facts the plaintiff alleges in his complaint are accepted as true, but all the conclusions are rejected, is it still plausible (that is, more than speculative) to believe that additional discovery will fill in whatever gaps are left in the complaint?”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“reinvigoratfing] motion practice under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6)”); Cacho-Toires v. Miranda-Lopez, 2009 WL 1034873 , at n. 1 (D.P.R. Apr. 16, 2009) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“enough facts to raise [the claim] above the level of mere speculation”
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.