Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 983 F.2d 177 - Williams v. Rice

Williams v. Rice’s Empirical Analysis

983 F.2d 177 · 1993

Citation profile

127
cited by 127 later decisions
1
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

39 federal appellate · 58 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 127 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (1998), Dey v. Colt Construction & Development Co. (1994)

39 federal appellate · 58 district · 1 state decisions

5801993200020102020decided

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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Hall v. Bellmon · Hughey v. United States · Applied Genetics International, Inc. v. First Affiliated Securities, 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 127 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “'(1)protected opposition to discrimination or participation in a proceeding arising out of discrimination; (2)adverse action by the employer contemporaneously or subsequent to the employee's protected activity; and (3)a causal connection between such activity and the employer's action.'”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “view the evidence and draw any inferences in a light most favorable to the party opposing summary judgment, but that party must identify sufficient evidence which would require submission of the case to a jury.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
    5 later decisions 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.