Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 429 F.3d 480 - Miles v. Dell, Inc.

Miles v. Dell, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

429 F.3d 480 · 2005

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
January 2024
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 12 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently January 2024 · most notably Lettieri v. Equant Inc. (2007), Warch v. Ohio Casualty Insurance (2006)

7 federal appellate · 12 district ·

400200520102020decided

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 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters · 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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[a] plaintiff's EEOC charge defines the scope of her subsequent right to institute a civil suit. See Evans v. Technologies Applications and Serv. Co., 80 F.3d 954, 962-63 (4th Cir.1996). If a plaintiff's claims in her judicial complaint are reasonably related to her EEOC charge and can be expected to follow from a reasonable administrative investigation, the plaintiff may advance such claims in her subsequent civil suit. See Chisholm v. United States Postal Serv., 665 F.2d 482 , 491 (4th Cir.1981).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “in order to make out a prima facie case of discriminatory termination, a plaintiff must ordinarily show that the position ultimately was filled by someone not a member of the protected class.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the second individual's hiring decision has no probative value whatsoever as to whether the first individual's firing decision was motivated by the plaintiff's protected status.”
    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.