Brunozzi v. Cable Communications, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
851 F.3d 990 · 2017
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 207
Relies on Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. · Walling US v. Helmerich & Payne · Walling US v. Youngerman-Reynolds Hardwood Co · McLinn F/v Fjord Johnson F/v Supersonic Churchill v. F/v Fjord F/v Supersonic F/v Supersonic · Bay Ridge Operating Co. v. Aaron
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our role when interpreting a state statute as a matter of first impression is to determine what meaning the state's highest court would give to the law. Thus, we must follow the state's rules of statutory interpretation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“for the reason that the employee has in good faith reported information that the employee believes is evidence of a violation of a state or federal law, rule or regulation.”
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.