Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 179 FSUPP2D 987 - Stricker v. Cessford Construction Co.

Stricker v. Cessford Construction Co.’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. · Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) the employer knew, or in the exercise of ordinary care should have known, of its employee’s unfitness at the time the employee engaged in wrongful or tortious conduct; (2) through the negligent ... supervision of the employee, the employee’s incompetence, unfitness, or dangerous characteristics proximately caused injuries to the plaintiff; and (3) there is some employment or agency relationship between the employee and the defendant employer.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a duty to exercise reasonable care in hiring individuals, who, because of their employment, may pose a threat of injury to members of the public. ... [S]uch a claim likewise includes an action for negligent retention and negligent supervision.”
    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.