Mace v. Willis’s Empirical Analysis
897 F.3d 926 · 2018
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
March 2019
most recently cited
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 38 U.S.C. § 4312 · 38 U.S.C. § 4316
Relies on Hill v. Michelin North America, Inc. · Maxfield v. Cintas Corp. No. 2 · Lisdahl v. Mayo Foundation
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]lthough 'USERRA cannot put the employee in a better position than if he or she had remained in the civilian employment position,' 20 C.F.R. § 1002.42 (c) (emphasis added), the Act 'must be broadly construed in favor of its military beneficiaries.' Maxfield v. Cintas Corp. No. 2 , 427 F.3d 544 , 551 (8th Cir. 2005) (quoting Hill v. Michelin N. Am., Inc. , 252 F.3d 307 , 312-13 (4th Cir. 2001) ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“USERRA rights are not diminished because an employee holds a temporary, part-time, probationary, or seasonal employment position.”
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.