4 F. Supp. 2d 1130 - Dilla v. West’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 2016
2 federal appellate ·
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 29 U.S.C. § 626 (§ 7 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 631 (§ 12 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 701 (Employment Opportunities for Individuals With Disabilities Act) · 5 U.S.C. § 8336
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Holland v. United States · Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins · Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins · O'CONNOR v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp.
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.
“[T]he fact that such a conclusion depended upon the drawing of inferences from [decisionmaker’s] statement undermined any attempt to characterize the statement as direct evidence, especially when viewed in the context of a conversation about the potential imminent retirement of a large percentage of [his] workforce, the statement was susceptible to differing interpretations: [He] may have been expressing his desire to offer the position to younger candidates because they would be [less 26 ] likely to retire quickly and thus potentially leave him short-staffed at an inconvenient time, or he may merely have been expressing his desire to hire someone with less civil service experience who would be statutorily-ineligible to retire for a long period of time, and who would therefore offer the high degree of ‘continuity* he sought in a candidate. Because it finds that the statement is subject to either of these interpretations, the latter of which is untainted by unlawful age bias, the court cannot conclude that the statement constitutes direct evidence of age discrimination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Gloetzner v. Lynch“[i]t is the very essence of age discrimination for an older employee to be fired because the employer believes that productivity and competence decline with old age ... Congress' promulgation of the ADEA was prompted by its concern that older workers were being deprived of employment on the basis of inaccurate and stigmatizing stereotypes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[T]he determination of whether the plaintiffs have established age discrimination by direct evidence is somewhat complicated by the fact that the definition of what constitutes direct evidence of discrimination is subject to frequent shifts, even among different panels of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.”
1 later decision 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.