Smith v. Bray’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

31 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

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

1. “In the absence of an admission, a retaliation plaintiff may also satisfy the causation or motive element by presenting a 'convincing mosaic’ of ‘circumstantial evidence’ that would support the inference that a retaliatory animus was at work.”); Johnson v. Metro. Gov’t of Nashville & Davidson Cty., Tenn., 502 Fed.Appx. 523 , 535 n. 4 (6th Cir.2012) (”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Brandli v. Micrus Endovascular Corporation

2. “As applied in this circuit, “cat’s paw” liability may be imposed on an employer where the plaintiff can show that an employee with discriminatory animus provided factual information or other input that may have affected the adverse employment action.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 62 F. Supp. 3d 821 - Tarochione v. Roberts Pipeline, Inc.

3. “[A]t least five circuits have indicated that a cat's paw theory would support imposing individual liability under § 1983 on subordinate governmental employees with unlawful motives who cause the real decision-makers to retaliate.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 7 F. Supp. 3d 304 - Siani v. State University of New York at Farmingdale