Balazs v. Liebenthal’s Empirical Analysis
32 F.3d 151 · 1994
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 13 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably Tinsley v. First Union National Bank (1998), Cheryl Hooven-Lewis v. Louis Caldera (2001)
17 federal appellate · 13 district · 5 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 (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 704 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 Weeks v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. · Patterson v. American Tobacco Co. · Holder v. City of Raleigh · Price v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. · Learned v. City of Bellevue
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] reasonable construction of the EEOC’s regulation!, 29 C.F.R. § 1601.12 (b),] would simply allow charges to be verified and to relate back only so long as the charge is a viable one in the EEOC’s files, but that where, as here, a right to sue letter has issued, a suit has been instituted and the EEOC has closed its file, there is no longer a charge pending before the EEOC which is capable of being amended. This construction of the regulation imparts cer tainty to the proceeding which is helpful to the parties and to the court, and at the same time it complies with the statutory requirement of verification without undermining the EEOC regulation.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“A charge may be amended to cure technical defects or omissions, including failure to verify the charge, or to clarify and amplify allegations made therein. Such amendments and amendments alleging additional acts which constitute unlawful employment practices related to or growing out of the subject matter of the original charge will relate back to the date the charge was first received.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“a sworn charge of discrimination with the EEOC is a mandatory prerequisite to the validity of the charge.”
2 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.