Burrell v. Star Nursery, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
170 F.3d 951 · 1999
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 11 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2021 · most notably McGinest v. GTE Service Corp. (2004), Shaw v. AutoZone, Inc. (1999)
26 federal appellate · 11 district · 2 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. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. · Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson · Faragher v. City of Boca Raton · Monge v. California · Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“only if the alleged harassment has not culminated in a tangible employment action....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“An employer is subject to vicarious liability to a victimized employee for an actionable hostile environment created by a supervisor with immediate (or successively higher) authority over the employee. When no tangible employment action is taken, a defending employer may raise an affirmative defense to liability or damages, subject to proof by a preponderance of the evidence.... No affirmative defense is available, however, when the supervisor's harassment culminates in a tangible employment action, such as discharge, demotion, or undesirable reassignment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“followed the rule that an employer may be found liable in a hostile work environment case only for what management-level employees 'knew or should have known.' ” Burrell, 170 F.3d at 955 (quoting Nichols v. Frank, 42 F.3d 503, 508 (9th Cir.1994)), and then declared”
1 later decision 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.