Rose v. New York City Board of Education’s Empirical Analysis
257 F.3d 156 · 2001
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably Hill v. Lockheed Martin Logistics Management, Inc. (2004), 50 Cal. 4th 512 - Reid v. Google, Inc. (2010)
24 federal appellate · 3 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 Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins · Butts v. City of New York Department of Housing Preservation & Development · Kirsch v. Fleet Street, Ltd. · Ostrowski v. Atlantic Mutual Insurance Companies · Binder v. Long Island Lighting 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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Price Waterhouse issue does not arise for the trier of fact until the plaintiff has carried the burden of persuading the trier that the forbidden animus was a motivating factor in the employment decision but has failed to persuade the trier that non-discriminatory reasons proffered by the employer were pretexts and not also motivating factors. Once the presentation of evidence is sufficient to create this possibility, the employer has the option of defending on the Price Waterhouse ground that it would have made the same decision even in the absence of a discriminatory motive. Price Waterhouse is thus a defense. However, for tactical reasons, it is often only the plaintiff who asks for a Price Water-house instruction ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“would fall within the scope of the EEOC investigation which can reasonably be expected to grow out of the charge that was made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“could reasonably be expected to inquire into other instances of alleged [retaliation] by the same actor.”
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.