Acha v. Beame’s Empirical Analysis
531 F.2d 648 · 1976
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2012 · most notably International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States (1977), 13 Fair empl.prac.cas. 705, 12 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 11,212 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Enterprise Association Steamfitters Local No. 638 of U. A., George Rios v. Enterprise Association Steamfitters Local No. 638 of U. A. (1976)
26 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 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 Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · Magna Oil Corp. v. Bateson · Ruckelshaus v. Sierra Club · Costarelli v. Massachusetts · Robinson v. Lorillard Corp.
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If a female police officer can show that, except for her sex, she would have been hired early enough to accumulate sufficient seniority to withstand current layoffs, then her layoff violates section 703(a)(1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), since it is based on sexual discrimination.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Nothing contained in this subchapter shall be interpreted to require any employer, em ployment agency, labor organization, or joint labor-management committee subject to this subchapter to grant preferential treatment to any individual or to any group because of the race, color, religion, sex, or national origin of such individual or group on account of an imbalance which may exist with respect to the total number or percentage of persons of any race, color, religion, sex, or national origin employed by any employer, referred or classified for employment by any employment agency or labor organization, admitted to membership or classified by any labor organization, or admitted to, or employed in, any apprenticeship or other training program, in comparison with the total number or percentage of persons of such race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in any community, State, section, or other area, or in the available work force in any community, State, section, or other area.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“. Section 706(g) provides that, upon a finding of unlawful discrimination, a court may enjoin the challenged employment practice and "order such affirmative relief as may be appropriate, which may include, but is not limited to, reinstatement or hiring of employees, with or without back pay ... or any other equitable relief as the court deems appropriate[,]” but that [n]o order of the court shall require the admission or reinstatement of an individual as an employee, or the hiring, reinstatement or promotion of an individual as an employee, or the payment to him of any back pay, if such individual was refused admission, suspended, or expelled, or was refused employment or advancement or was suspended or discharged for any reason other than discrimination on account of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin....”
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.