Arrigo v. Link’s Empirical Analysis
836 F.3d 787 · 2016
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 2615 (§ 105 of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on United States v. Berkowitz · Herrmann v. Cencom Cable Associates, Inc. · Adams v. City of Indianapolis · Gates v. Caterpillar, Inc. · Sanders v. Venture Stores, Inc.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] new trial is warranted only if the error has a substantial and injurious effect or influence on the determination of a jury and the result is inconsistent with substantial justice.”
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.