Nurriddin v. Bolden’s Empirical Analysis
818 F.3d 751 · 2016
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 25 district ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 705 · 29 U.S.C. § 791 · 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (§ 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (§ 102 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Karen Sutton Kimberly Hintons v. United Air Lines Inc · Kowal v. MCI Communications Corp.
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“evaluate[s] this question 'in light of the total circumstances of the case,' asking 'whether the jury could infer discrimination from the combination of (1) the plaintiff's prima facie case; (2) any evidence the plaintiff presents to attack the employer's proffered explanation for its actions; and (3) any further evidence of discrimination that may be available to the plaintiff ... or any contrary evidence that may be available to the employer.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We assume the truth of all well-pleaded factual allegations and construe reasonable inferences from those allegations in a plaintiff's favor.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“need not, however, 'accept inferences drawn by [a] plaintiff[ ] if such inferences are unsupported by the facts set out in the complaint.'”
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.