Johnson v. Perez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 20 district · 1 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]here is no rule of law that the testimony of a discrimination plaintiff, standing alone, can never make out a case of discrimination that could withstand a summary judgment motion. After all, evidence a party proffers in support of its cause will usually, in some sense, be "self-serving." It is nonetheless beyond question as a general proposition that parties, like other fact witnesses, are legally competent to give material testimony. Indeed, in many kinds of cases, parties are the key, or even sole, witnesses. To the extent the testimony of a witness who is also a party may be impaired by party self-interest, it is ordinarily the role of the jury - not the court on summary judgment - to discount it accordingly.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Mayorga v. Merdon · Smith v. Dist. of Columbia

2. “the parties agree about the facts-what happened-and the court accepts the movant's view of the legal implications of those facts, or ... when a putatively disputed body of evidentiary material could not, even assuming a sympathetic factfinder, reasonably support a finding crucial to the nonmoving party's legal position.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 308 F. Supp. 3d 359 - Rodriguez v. Adams Rest. Grp.

3. “there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Stoe v. Sessions