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.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 11 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 Aberman v. Board of Education.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Aberman v. Board of Education Anchor | green | “a reasonable factfinder to determine” | 7 |
| 2 | Zegarra v. John Crane, Inc. | green | “a district court must not limit its analysis to mcdonnell douglas or treat some evidence as relevant to the mcdonnell douglas analysis but not to the broader question of whether 'a reasonable factfinder could conclude that the plaintiff's race, ethnicity, sex, religion, or other…” | 4 |
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.