Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Wilson Metal Casket Co.’s Empirical Analysis
24 F.3d 836 · 1994
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently February 2023 · most notably Thurman v. Yellow Freight Systems, Inc. (1996), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Frank's Nursery & Crafts, Inc. (1999)
28 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 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 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 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 Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · Hecht Co. v. Bowles · Lemon v. Kurtzman · Loeffler v. Frank · Logiudice v. Georgia
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An award of “prejudgment interest ... (ellipsis in original) is an element of complete compensation” in a Title VII back pay award. Prejudgment interest helps to make victims of discrimination whole and compensates them for the true cost of money damages they incurred. This court commonly awards prejudgment interest on back pay awards.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“give notice of potential Title VII liability to an alleged wrongdoer and allow the EEOC to attempt to conciliate with the wrongdoer rather than go to court.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“where a substantially related non-filed claim arises out of the same time frame as a timely filed claim, the complainant need not satisfy Title VII's filing requirement to recover.”
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.