Bak v. Postal Service, (U.S.)’s Empirical Analysis
52 F.3d 241 · 1995
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently December 2017
9 federal appellate · 2 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. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)
Relies on Isaksen v. Vermont Castings, Inc. · Nobile v. Schindler · Stevens v. Department of Treasury · Vinieratos v. United States, Department of the Air Force ex rel. Aldridge · Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Farmer Bros.
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that a claimant is no longer required to exhaust his administrative remedies with regard to an age discrimination claim prior to filing a civil suit. The result of [29 C.F.R. § ] 1613.513, in effect at the time Bak filed his complaint, is to terminate any unexhausted administrative proceedings when a claimant files a civil suit. Similarly, an exhaustion requirement would terminate any civil suit filed. Thus, the joint effect of the amended regulations and exhaustion requirement would be to leave the claimant without any avenue of relief ... [A]n exhaustion requirement in this case would still prejudice Bak because he has no forum in which to bring his age discrimination claim: the time for filing another administrative complaint has expired, and an exhaustion requirement would preclude a civil suit. The primary goal of the exhaustion requirement is to prevent simultaneous proceedings regarding the same claim.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Morris v. McHugh“is no longer required to exhaust his administrative remedies with regard to an age discrimination claim prior to filing civil suit.”
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.