Cram v. Lamson & Sessions Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
1 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 718 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Upjohn Company v. United States · Anderson v. United States · Hall v. Gus Construction Co. · Polycast Technology Corp. v. Uniroyal, Inc. · 720 F. Supp. 1080 - Papanicolaou v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Because the former employee no longer works on the organization’s behalf, the former employee will not be a party to settlement negotiations. Polycast, 129 F.R.D. at 625 ; see Hanntz, 766 F.Supp. at 265 ; Goff, 145 F.R.D. at 354. Furthermore, an attorney-client relationship between former employee and the employer’s attorney is unlikely. Accordingly, the risk of jeopardizing an attorney-client relationship is substantially diminished. Polycast, 129 F.R.D. at 625 ; see Hanntz, 766 F.Supp. at 265 . * * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.