Sylvester TIPLER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. E. I. duPONT deNEMOURS AND CO., Inc., Defendant-Appellant’s Empirical Analysis
443 F.2d 125 · 1971
Citation profile
139 federal appellate · 21 district · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 278 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2024 · most notably Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc. (1975), Senter v. General Motors Corp. (1976)
139 federal appellate · 21 district · 26 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 Commissioner v. Sunnen · United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Co. · Stern v. Board of Levee Commissioners · White v. United States · Lawrence Metze v. New York
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 278 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“limited to the scope of the EEOC investigation reasonably expected to grow out of the charge of discrimination.”
17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[n]either collateral estoppel nor res judicata is rigidly applied. Both rules are qualified or rejected when their application would contravene an overriding public policy or result in manifest injustice.”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Absent a special consideration, a determination arising solely under one statute should not automatically be binding when a similar question arises under another statute, [citations] This is because the purposes, requirements, perspective and configuration of different statutes ordinarily vary. This case provides an excellent example of the differences in the two statutes. Racial discrimination in employment violates Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act if the discrimination is unjustified and interferes with the affected employees’ right to act concertedly for their own aid or protection, [citation] In contrast, racial discrimination in employment is prohibited by Title VII without reference to the effect on the employees’ right to unite. Hence, certain discriminatory practices that are valid under the National Labor Relations Act may be invalid under Title VII.”
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.