Walker v. Mortham’s Empirical Analysis
158 F.3d 1177 · 1998
Citation profile
54 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 190 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably Alexander v. Fulton County (2000), Pennington v. City of Huntsville (2001)
54 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Landgraf v. USI Film Products
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 190 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“both the Supreme Court and this court have observed that evidence showing an employer hired a less qualified applicant over the plaintiff may be probative of whether the employer's proffered reason for not promoting plaintiff was pretextual”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he plaintiff must prove the following four elements: 1) that she belongs to a protected class; (2) that she was qualified for and applied for a job for which the employer was seeking applicants; 3) that, despite her qualifications, she was rejected; and 4) that, after her rejection, the employer continued to seek applicants or filled the position with a person outside of the plaintiffs protected group.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a panel should look to the line of authority containing the earliest case”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.