Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 217 F.3d 621 - Stuart v. General Motors Corp.

Stuart v. General Motors Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

217 F.3d 621 · 2000

Citation profile

151
cited by 151 later decisions
5
states following
May 2021
most recently cited

39 federal appellate · 24 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 151 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably Sprenger v. Federal Home Loan Bank (2001), Delores Turner v. Iowa Fire Equipment Company an Iowa Corporation Iowa Fire Equipment Company Third Party (2000)

39 federal appellate · 24 district · 8 state decisions

1130200020102020decided

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 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. · Faragher v. City of Boca Raton · Ryther v. KARE 11

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

  1. “the amount of time elapsed between the notice of harassment, which includes but is not limited to a complaint of sexual harassment, and the remedial action, and the options available to the employer such as employee training sessions, disciplinary action taken against the harasser(s), reprimands in personnel files, and terminations, and whether or not the measures ended the harassment.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(a) she is a member in a protected group; (b) she was subject to unwelcome sexual harassment; (c) the harassment was based on sex; (d) the harassment affected a term, condition, or privilege of employment; and (e) the employer knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take proper remedial action.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “for any discrimination that grows out of or is like or reasonably related to the substance of the allegations in the administrative charge.”
    7 later decisions 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.