Lopez v. Burris Logistics Co.’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
4 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 29 U.S.C. § 215 · 29 U.S.C. § 651 (§ 2 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970) · 29 U.S.C. § 652 (§ 3 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970) · 29 U.S.C. § 660 (§ 11 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Chambers v. Time Warner, 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]f a plaintiff's termination violated a public policy embodied and protected by statute, the claim for common law wrongful discharge is precluded. See, e.g., Burnham , 252 Conn. at 162 , 745 A.2d 178 ("The existence of this statutory remedy precludes the plaintiff from bringing a common-law wrongful discharge action based on an alleged violation of § 31-51(b)"); Swihart [ v. Pactiv Corp. ], 187 F.Supp.2d [18,] 25 [ (D. Conn. 2002) ] (Because "plaintiff already ha[d] an adequate statutory remedy" for employer's discriminatory practices under Title VII, the Court would "not recognize a separate claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy"); Thomas v. Saint Francis Hosp. and Med. Ctr. , 990 F.Supp. 81 , 90 (D. Conn.1998) (holding it "fatal" to plaintiff's claim that there was "the availability of redress for defendant's alleged discriminatory conduct under federal and state antidiscrimination laws"), aff'd, 198 F.3d 235 (2d Cir.1999) (Table); Sherman v. Sedgwick James of Connecticut, Inc. , No. CV 326150, 1997 WL 83714 , at (Conn.Super.Ct. Feb. 10, 1997) (granting defendant's motion to strike wrongful discharge count based on the public policy of preserving an employee's right to petition the government where plaintiff alleged an additional count for a violation of § 31-51q ). In sum, if "a relevant state or federal law contains a private right of action which serves to protect the public policy allegedly violated, a wrongful discharge claim will fail." Nanos v.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Any employer ... who subjects any employee to discipline or discharge on account of the exercise by such employee of rights guaranteed by the first amendment to the United States Constitution or section 3, 4 or 14 of article first of the Constitution of the state, provided such activity does not substantially or materially interfere with the employee's bona fide job performance or the working relationship between the employee and the employer, shall be liable to such employee for damages caused by such discipline or discharge, including punitive damages, and for reasonable attorneys fees as part of the costs of any such action for damages.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“if a plaintiff's termination violated a public policy embodied and protected by statute, the claim for common law wrongful discharge is precluded.”
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.