Million v. Frank’s Empirical Analysis
47 F.3d 385 · 1995
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 28 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Graham-Humphreys v. Memphis Brooks Museum of Art, Inc. (2000), Tello v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. (2005)
15 federal appellate · 28 district ·
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. § 791 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. · Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs · Bryson Properties, XVIII v. Travelers Insurance Co. · City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Equitable tolling may be appropriate where `the defendant has actively misled the plaintiff respecting the cause of action, or where the plaintiff has in some extraordinary way been prevented from asserting his rights.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is a condition precedent to suit that functions like a statute of limitations.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] newly enacted statute that lengthens the applicable statute of limitations may not be applied retroactively to revive a plaintiffs claim that was otherwise barred under the old statutory scheme because to do so would ‘alter the substantive rights’ of a party and ‘increase a party’s liability.’ In this case the rights of the defendant would be altered and its liability increased because it would be forced to defend an action that was previously time-barred.”
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.