Markham Et Al. v. Geller’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
197 federal appellate · 69 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 466 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2016 · most notably Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins (1993), Smith v. City of Jackson (2005)
197 federal appellate · 69 district · 24 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 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 623 (§ 4 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)
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 466 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In my view, Congress did not intend the ADEA to have the restraining influence on local governments which will result from the decision below. Congress revealed this intention in 29 U.S.C. § 623 (f)(1), which provides that it shall not be unlawful for an employer to take any action otherwise prohibited “where the differentiation is based on reasonable factors other than age.””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or (2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent““The relatively higher cost of employing older workers as a group is generally rejected as an RFOA [reasonable factor other than age]. The cost of employing an older worker when considered on an individual basis, however, may constitute an RFOA.” B. Schlei & P. Grossman, Employment Discrimination Law 506 (2d ed. 1983).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.