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.
5 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 261 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 Gary E. Wallis, Husband Carol Wallis, Wife v. J.R. Simplot Company.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gary E. Wallis, Husband Carol Wallis, Wife v. J.R. Simplot Company Anchor | green | “is minimal and does not even need to rise to the level of a preponderance of the evidence.” | 113 |
| 2 | Richard D. Peterson v. Hewlett-Packard Co., a Corporation | green | “similarly situated individuals outside his protected class were treated more favorably, or other circumstances surrounding the adverse employment action give rise to an inference of discrimination.” | 68 |
| 3 | Merrick v. Farmers Insurance Group | green | “a bright, intelligent, knowledgeable young man” | 36 |
| 4 | Cohen v. Fred Meyer, Inc. | green | “essential to a causal link is evidence that the employer was aware that the plaintiff had engaged in the protected activity.” | 32 |
| 5 | 61 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1505, 62 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 42,511 William L. Nesbit v. Pepsico, Inc., Charles A. Selby v. Pepsico, Inc. | green | “we don't necessarily like grey hair” | 12 |
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.