Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 891 P2D 607 - Taylor v. Cache Creek Nursing Centers

Taylor v. Cache Creek Nursing Centers’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
3
states following
February 2015
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently February 2015

6 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

40199420002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Salve Regina College v. Russell · Burk v. K-Mart Corp. · Tate v. Browning-Ferris, Inc. · Buckner v. General Motors Corp. · Weeks Ex Rel. Weeks v. Wedgewood Village, 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “produce evidence that gives rise to a legal inference her firing was 'significantly motivated' by retaliation for filing the claim.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The clear intent of the Retaliatory Discharge Act is "to prohibit discrimination against employees who either initiated or participated in workers' compensation proceedings." Ingram v. Oneok, Inc., 775 P.2d 810, 811 (Okla.1989). Exempting subsequent employers from the statute would allow them to defeat the Legislature's intent by firing or threatening to fire workers who had exercised their statutory rights. Additionally, such an exemption could readily discourage employees from exercising those rights. Therefore, we hold 85 O.S.Supp.1993 § 5 does apply to successor business employers.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “person, firm, partnership or corporation [from] discharg[ing] any employee because the employee has ... instituted or caused to be instituted, in good faith, any proceeding under the [Oklahoma Workers' Compensation Act].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.