Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 666 F.3d 1377 - McGrath v. Clinton

McGrath v. Clinton’s Empirical Analysis

666 F.3d 1377 · 2012

Citation profile

107
cited by 107 later decisions
July 2020
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 79 district ·

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 12101 (§ 2 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) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 704 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White · Clark County School District v. Breeden · Brady v. Office of the Sergeant at Arms

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

  1. “(1) that he opposed a practice made unlawful by Title VII; (2) that the employer took a materially adverse action against him; and (3) that the employer took the action "because" the employee opposed the practice.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[Once] the employer has proffered a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for a challenged employment action, the central question is whether the employee produced sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find that the employer’s asserted non-retaliatory reason was not the actual reason and that the employer intentionally retaliated against the employee in violation of Title VII.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “because [s]he has opposed any practice made an unlawful employment practice”
    3 later decisions 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.