Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 519 FSUPP 1096 - Brown v. ASD Computing Center

Brown v. ASD Computing Center’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
1
states following
December 2012
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently December 2012 · most notably DiCarlo v. Potter (2004), Cooper v. City of North Olmsted (1986)

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

1601981199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1732 · 28 U.S.C. § 1733 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 704 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters · Lombard v. Marcera

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

  1. “1. ) participation in protected activity; 2. ) that the employer knew of this protected activity; 3. ) that plaintiff was subsequently discharged or subjected to other damages; and 4. ) that the employer had a retaliatory motive or that the timing of its action was such as to allow an inference of retaliation to arise.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “This court agrees with the utility of such an inference, but would hesitate to expand its scope ... where there are no other indicia of retaliation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “so connected in time as to create an inference of retaliation, [and, thus,] the evidence fails to establish a prima facie case of retaliation”
    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.