Thomas v. United States, 542 U.S. 932 (2004). · Go Syfert
Search
Thomas v. United States, 542 U.S. 932 (2004). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“sole issue is that he was entitled to a jury trial on his retaliation claim under . .. we find this claim to be without merit.”
21 citation events (21 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Williams v. Quality Technology, Incorporated (vaed, 2020-02-18)
Treatment trajectory · 2004 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2004 2015 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Williams v. Quality Technology, Incorporated
E.D. Va. · 2020 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
sole issue is that he was entitled to a jury trial on his retaliation claim under . .. we find this claim to be without merit.
discussed Cited "see" Molitor v. Sulphur
W.D. La. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
See Karmer v. Banc of America Securities, LLC, 355 F.3d 961 (7 th Cir. 2004), cert. denied, 542 U.S. 932 , 124 S.Ct. 2876 (2004); Alvarado v. Cajun Operating Co., 588 F.3d 1261, 1269 (9th Cir. 2009) (there is no availability of compensatory and punitive damages for ADA retaliation claims, thus no right to a jury trial); see also Payne v. Hammond City, 2025 WL 549360 (U.S.E.D.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Thomas
v.
United States
03-10537.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 21, 2004.
542 U.S. 932
Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 63%
Citer courts: E.D. Virginia (1)

542 U.S. 932

THOMAS
v.
UNITED STATES.

No. 03-10537.

Supreme Court of United States.

June 21, 2004.

1

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.