District of Columbia· 9/29/2008
Von Muhlenbrock v. Billington
Citations
- 579 F. Supp. 2d 39
- 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75435
- 2008 WL 4381542
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment with respect to a Title VII retaliation claim because the plaintiff failed to establish a causal connection between protected activity and adverse action
- granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment with respect to a Title VII retaliation claim because the plaintiff failed to establish a causal connection between protected activity and adverse action
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Paul L. Friedman
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Pearsall v. HolderDistrict of Columbia· 2009-04-28· cited 56×
- Talavera v. ForeDistrict of Columbia· 2009-08-31· cited 25×
- Lane v. VasquezDistrict of Columbia· 2013-07-12· cited 18×
- Salar v. PruittDistrict of Columbia· 2017-09-30· cited 15×
- Benjamin v. DuncanDistrict of Columbia· 2010-03-17· cited 13×
- Smith v. NapolitanoDistrict of Columbia· 2009-06-22· cited 11×
- Youssef v. Federal Bureau of InvestigationDistrict of Columbia· 2014-08-01· cited 11×
- Mulrain v. DonovanDistrict of Columbia· 2012-10-29· cited 10×
- Paulk v. Architect of the CapitolDistrict of Columbia· 2015-02-03· cited 6×
- Unique Industries, Inc. v. 965207 Alberta Ltd.District of Columbia· 2011-02-17
- Benjamin v. SpellingsDistrict of Columbia· 2010-03-17
- Talavera v. ShahDistrict of Columbia· 2009-08-31
- Smith v. PaulisonDistrict of Columbia· 2009-06-22
- Pearsall v. GonzalezDistrict of Columbia· 2009-04-28
- Salak v. McCarthyDistrict of Columbia· 2017-09-30
Cites
32 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×
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 119,442×
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court· 1986-03-26· cited 58,760×
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court· 1973-05-14· cited 38,518×
- Scott v. HarrisSupreme Court· 2007-04-30· cited 13,305×
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court· 2000-06-12· cited 12,455×
- St. Mary's Honor Center v. HicksSupreme Court· 1993-06-25· cited 8,844×
- Clark County School District v. BreedenSupreme Court· 2001-04-23· cited 3,456×
- United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. AikensSupreme Court· 1983-04-04· cited 2,660×
- Holcomb, Christine v. Powell, DonaldD.C. Circuit· 2006-01-10· cited 1,529×
- Brady v. Office of the Sergeant at ArmsD.C. Circuit· 2008-03-28· cited 1,336×
- Etim U. Aka v. Washington Hospital CenterD.C. Circuit· 1998-10-09· cited 1,302×
- Ross J. Laningham v. United States NavyD.C. Circuit· 1987-03-17· cited 1,192×
- Rotella v. WoodSupreme Court· 2000-02-23· cited 698×
- Czekalski, Loni v. Peters, MaryD.C. Circuit· 2007-02-02· cited 674×
- Ronald J. Fischbach v. District of Columbia Department of Corrections and Hallem H. Williams, Jr.D.C. Circuit· 1996-07-15· cited 586×
- Mastro, Brian A. v. Potomac Elec PowerD.C. Circuit· 2006-05-19· cited 492×
- Washington Post Company v. U.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesD.C. Circuit· 1989-01-06· cited 355×
- Kronisch v. United StatesSecond Circuit· 1998-07-09· cited 294×
- Hussain, Mohammed v. Nicholson, R. JamesD.C. Circuit· 2006-01-31· cited 224×
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.