Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 515 F.2d 301 - Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Detroit Edison Co.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Detroit Edison Co.’s Empirical Analysis

515 F.2d 301 · 1975

Citation profile

282
cited by 282 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
January 2018
most recently cited

125 federal appellate · 26 district · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 282 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2018 · most notably International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States (1977), Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance v. Knudson (2002)

125 federal appellate · 26 district · 12 state decisions

175019751980199020002010decided

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 · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Sierra Club v. Morton · Steele v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad · Curtis v. Loether

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 282 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““. .. Back pay in Title VII cases is considered a form of restitution, not an award of damages. . . . ””
    16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “passively accept practices which discriminate”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(a) For all claims arising under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, the plaintiff class shall include all minority persons (i. e., blacks, Spanish-Surnameds, Orientals and American Indians) who: (1) Were members, registrants, apprentices or otherwise affiliated with defendant Local 542 at any time between April 30, 1968, and the date of this decree; (2) Applied for membership or affiliation with defendant Local 542, or who would have applied for membership or affiliation with Local 542 but were deterred from doing so because of Local 542's discriminatory practices, at any time between April 30, 1968, and the date of this decree; and (3) Apply for membership or affiliation with defendant Local 542 from the date of this decree until this Court dismisses jurisdiction over this action. (b) For all claims arising under the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1871, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1985(3), and under 29 U.S.C. § 158 , the plaintiff class shall include all minority persons who: (1) Were members, registrants, apprentices or otherwise affiliated with defendant Local 542 at any time between November 8, 1965, and the date of this decree; (2) Applied for membership or affiliation with defendant Local 542, or who would have applied for membership or affiliation with Local 542 but were deterred from doing so because of Local 542's discriminatory practices, at any time between November 8, 1965, and the date of this decree; and (3) Apply for membership o”
    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.