Cherry v. Ritenour School District’s Empirical Analysis
361 F.3d 474 · 2004
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Wierman v. Casey's General Stores (2011), Gilooly v. Missouri Department of Health & Senior Services (2005)
28 federal appellate · 2 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 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. · Raytheon Co. v. Hernandez · Kiel v. Select Artificials, Inc. · Harvey v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]lthough it is possible for strong evidence of a prima facie case to also present a factual issue on pretext, the ultimate question is whether the plaintiff presents evidence of conduct or statements by persons involved in [the employer's] decision-making process reflective of a discriminatory attitude sufficient to allow a reasonable jury to infer that that attitude was a motivating factor in [the employer's] decision to fire [the plaintiff].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“`[TSA's] proffered reason [for discharging Hussein] is that [Hussein] was not performing the job satisfactorily, which is simply the negative of one of the elements of the prima facie case.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he presumptive case requires only a minimal showing, while a showing of pretext requires more substantial evidence.”
2 later decisions 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.