Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 25 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Anna M. Jensen v. Jack E. Potter, Postmaster General Us Postal Service.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Anna M. Jensen v. Jack E. Potter, Postmaster General Us Postal Service Anchor | green | “the ultimate question in any retaliation case is an intent to retaliate vel non.” | 9 |
| 2 | Anna M. Jensen v. Jack E. Potter, Postmaster General Us Postal Service | green | “the existence of a pattern of antagonism in the intervening period.” | 8 |
| 3 | Blozis v. Mellon Trust of Delaware National Ass'n | green | “to determine whether, upon reviewing all the facts and inferences to be drawn therefrom in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, there exists sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the employer intentionally discriminated against the pl…” | 8 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.