Hook v. Ernst & Young’s Empirical Analysis
28 F.3d 366 · 1994
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 84 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Woodson v. Scott Paper Co. (1997), Starceski 94-3208 v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation 94-3182 (1995)
37 federal appellate · 5 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 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 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins
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 84 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where a jury charge is attacked for legal error we must determine whether `the charge[taken] as a whole fairly and adequately submits the issues in the case to the jury.' We will reverse `only if the instruction was capable of confusing and thereby misleading the jury.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an unlawful employment practice is established when the complaining party demonstrates that [the forbidden consideration] was a motivating factor for any employment practice, even though other factors also motivated the practice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a plaintiff whose employment position is eliminated in a corporate reorganization or work force reduction carries a heavier burden in supporting charges of discrimination than does an employee discharged for other reasons.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.