Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 520 F.3d 662 - Atanus v. Perry

Atanus v. Perry’s Empirical Analysis

520 F.3d 662 · 2008

Citation profile

105
cited by 105 later decisions
1
states following
December 2023
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 105 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably Silverman v. Board of Education (2011), Cracco v. Vitran Express, Inc. (2009)

22 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

750200820102020decided

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) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. · Faragher v. City of Boca Raton

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

  1. “(1) suspicious timing, ambiguous oral or written statements, or behavior toward or comments directed at other employees in the protected group; (2) evidence, whether or not rigorously statistical, that similarly situated employees outside the protected class received systematically better treatment; and (3) evidence that the employee was qualified for the job in question but was passed over in favor of a person outside the protected class and the employer’s reason is a pretext for discrimination.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “ 'direct' proof of discrimination is not limited to near-admissions by the employer that its decisions were based on a proscribed criterion (e.g., 'You're too old to work here.’), but also includes circumstantial evidence which suggests discrimination through a longer chain of inferences.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[e]mployers are justified in reprimanding employees more severely for repeated errors.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.