8 Fair empl.prac.cas. 577, 8 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9658 William A. Waters and Donald Samuels v. Wisconsin Steel Works of International William A. Waters and Donald a Corporation, and United Order of American Bricklayers and Stone Masons, Local 21, an Unincorporated Association, United Order of American Bricklayers and Stone Masons, Local 21 v. William A. Waters and Donald Samuels, International Harvester Company v. William A. Waters and Donald Samuels’s Empirical Analysis
502 F.2d 1309 · 1974
Citation profile
132 federal appellate · 8 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 267 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2012 · most notably Blum v. Stenson (1984), Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mutual Hospital Insurance (1976)
132 federal appellate · 8 district · 6 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
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Monroe v. Pape · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co. · King v. Smith
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 267 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved, and the skill requisite to perform the legal service properly. (2) The likelihood, if apparent to the client, that the acceptance of the particular employment will preclude other employment by the lawyer. (3) The fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services. (4) The amount involved and the results obtained. (5) The time limitations imposed by the client or by the circumstances. (6) The nature and length of the professional relationship with the client. (7) The experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer or lawyers performing the services. (8) Whether the fee is fixed or contingent.”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"Title VII speaks only to the future. Its backward gaze is found only on a present practice which may perpetuate past discrimination. An employment seniority system embodying the `last hired, first fired' principle does not of itself perpetuate past discrimination. To hold otherwise would be tantamount to shackling white employees with a burden of a past discrimination created not by them but by their employer. Title VII was not designed to nurture such reverse discriminatory preferences. Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424, 430-431 , 91 S.Ct. 849 , 28 L.Ed.2d 158 (1971)."”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Having passed scrutiny under ... Title VII, the employment seniority system utilized by Wisconsin Steel is not violative of 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1981 .”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. 52 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1001, 53 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 39,797 N.A.A.C.P., Detroit Branch the Guardians, Inc. Brady Bruenton Cynthia Martin Hilton Napoleon Sharron Randolph Betty T. Rolland Grant Battle Cynthia Cheatom Evin Fobbs John H. Hawkins Helen Poelnitz, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Detroit Police Officers Association (Dpoa) David Watroba, President City of Detroit Coleman A. Young, Mayor Detroit Police Dept., Board of Police Commissioners William Hart, Chief William Milliken, Governor the Michigan Employment Relations Commission · Chance v. Board of Examiners & the Board of Education
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.