District of Columbia· 11/13/2000
Hanna v. Herman
Citations
- 121 F. Supp. 2d 113
- 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16919
- 2000 WL 1721079
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- finding that disclosure to an officer within another department of the plaintiffs agency “would be covered by the “need to know” exception as a matter of law.”
- “Plaintiff must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he made a protected disclosure, that subsequent to the disclosure he was subject to disciplinary action, and that the disclosure was a contributing factor to the personnel action taken against him.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Huvelle
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Velikonja v. MuellerDistrict of Columbia· 2004-04-13· cited 42×
- Doe v. United States Department of JusticeDistrict of Columbia· 2009-10-06· cited 37×
- Brady v. LivingoodDistrict of Columbia· 2006-09-29· cited 33×
- Dick v. HolderDistrict of Columbia· 2014-09-10· cited 17×
- Webster v. United States Department of EnergyDistrict of Columbia· 2017-08-25· cited 17×
- Davis v. JOSEPH J. MAGNOLIA, INC.District of Columbia· 2011-09-30· cited 10×
- Furey v. MnuchinD.C. Circuit· 2018-09-24· cited 9×
- Hill v. Department of DefenseDistrict of Columbia· 2013-07-22· cited 7×
- Rand v. GEITHNERDistrict of Columbia· 2010-08-11· cited 4×
- Williams v. Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for DcDistrict of Columbia· 2015-06-23· cited 4×
- Duncan v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict of Columbia· 2006-04-04· cited 3×
- Brown v. VilsackDistrict of Columbia· 2013-02-11· cited 2×
- Davis v. Joseph J. Magnolia, Inc.District of Columbia· 2011-10-01
- Robinson v. SpellingsDistrict of Columbia· 2011-04-07
- Adair v. ChaoDistrict of Columbia· 2010-09-30
- Rand v. Secretary of the TreasuryDistrict of Columbia· 2010-08-11
- Furey v. MnuchinDistrict of Columbia· 2018-09-24
- Tran v. United States Department of the TreasuryDistrict of Columbia· 2019-01-15
- McLane v. SalazarDistrict of Columbia· 2021-06-21
- Dinh Tran v. Dep't of TreasuryD.C. Circuit· 2019-01-15
Cites
28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 135,235×
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court· 1973-05-14· cited 38,518×
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court· 1981-03-04· cited 15,585×
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court· 2000-06-12· cited 12,455×
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court· 1938-12-05· cited 12,026×
- St. Mary's Honor Center v. HicksSupreme Court· 1993-06-25· cited 8,844×
- Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court· 1877-04-16· cited 2,216×
- Etim U. Aka v. Washington Hospital CenterD.C. Circuit· 1998-10-09· cited 1,302×
- Loyce E. Hayes v. Department of the NavyFederal Circuit· 1984-02-09· cited 592×
- Ronald J. Fischbach v. District of Columbia Department of Corrections and Hallem H. Williams, Jr.D.C. Circuit· 1996-07-15· cited 586×
- Nevada v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1983-06-24· cited 560×
- Rokki Knee Carr v. Social Security AdministrationFederal Circuit· 1999-07-30· cited 497×
- Washington Post Company v. U.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesD.C. Circuit· 1989-01-06· cited 355×
- Holbrook, Dawnele v. Reno, JanetD.C. Circuit· 1999-11-26· cited 296×
- Lawrence D. Mungin v. Katten Muchin & Zavis, A/K/A Katten Muchin Zavis & Weitzman, F/d/b/a Katten Muchin Zavis & DombroffD.C. Circuit· 1997-07-08· cited 238×
- Carney, Darion M. v. Amer UnivD.C. Circuit· 1998-08-11· cited 211×
- Brewer v. United States Postal ServiceCourt of Claims· 1981-04-12· cited 184×
- Jane Doe v. Robert E. Hampton, Individually and as Chairman, U. S. Civil Service CommissionD.C. Circuit· 1977-11-03· cited 164×
- Albright v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1984-04-10· cited 137×
- David POPE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, RespondentFederal Circuit· 1997-06-05· cited 128×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.