Builders Association of Greater Chicago v. County of Cook, and Association of Asian Construction Enterprises, Intervening-Defendants-Appellants’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district ·

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

1. “Another unresolved issue is whether a different, and specifically a more permissive, standard is applicable to preferential treatment on the basis of sex rather than race or ethnicity.... But since here, as in Milwaukee County Pavers, the County doesn't argue for a different standard for the minority and women’s set-aside programs, the women's program must clear the same four hurdles as the minority program.'') (citing Milwaukee County Pavers Ass’n v. Fiedler, 922 F.2d 419, 422 (7th Cir.1991)). 4 .IDOT also argues that it has independently demonstrated that it has a compelling interest in”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Northern Contracting v. State of Illinois

2. “passive participation” should be limited to situations where a government unit might be deemed “a kind of joint tortfeasor, coconspirator, or aider and abettor”). This standard has not been adopted by either this Circuit or the Supreme Court. 15 . DynaLantic also asserted that the studies are”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 885 F. Supp. 2d 237 - Dynalantic Corp. v. United States Department of Defense