Stephanie Walker’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 106 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably 238 F. Supp. 2d 66 - Dickerson v. SecTek, Inc. (2002), Dehart v. Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations, Inc. (2007)
1 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
Relies on Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. · Faragher v. City of Boca Raton · Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth · United States v. Parker · Mattern v. Eastman Kodak Co.
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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First we determine whether the complaining employee suffered a “tangible employment action.” 15 If he has, the claim is classified as a “quid pro quo” case; if he has not, the claim is classified as a “hostile environment” case. In a quid pro quo suit, proof that a tangible employment action resulted from a supervisor’s sexual harassment renders the employer vicariously liable, and no affirmative defense can be asserted. In a hostile environment ease, however, the next inquiry is whether the supervisor’s actions constituted severe or pervasive sexual harassment: If the conduct was not severe or pervasive, the employer cannot be held liable vicariously for the supervisor’s actions; if the conduct was severe and pervasive, the employer is vicariously liable unless the employer can establish both prongs of the conjunctive Ellerth/Faragher affirmative defense-the only affirmative defense to vicarious liability now available in a supervisor sexual harassment hostile work environment case. To establish this de fense, the employer must show that (1) the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexual harassment, and (2) the complaining employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventative or corrective opportunities provided by the employer.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“summary judgment will be affirmed only when [we are] convinced, after an independent review of the record, that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gary Lee Hatfield“conversations in which a co-worker and supervisor used the word 'n****r'”
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.