12 Fair empl.prac.cas. 755, 11 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,757 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the City of New York v. Local 638 . . . Local 28 of the Sheet Metal Workers' International Association and Local 28 Joint Apprenticeship Committee, Sheet Metal and Air-Conditioning Contractors' Association of New York City, Inc., Etc., Local 28, Third-Party v. New York State Division of Human Rights, Third-Party Local 28 Joint Apprenticeship Committee, Fourth-Party v. New York State Division of Human Rights, Fourth-Party’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
56 federal appellate · 12 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 96 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2017 · most notably Local 28 of the Sheet Metal Workers' International Ass'n v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (1986), Angeline OSTAPOWICZ, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOHNSON BRONZE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant (1976)
56 federal appellate · 12 district · 4 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 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · Marco Defunis et al. v. Charles Odegaard, President of the University of Washington. · 6 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1045, 6 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 8974 the Vulcan Society of the New York City Fire Department, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellees-Appellants v. Civil Service Commission of the City of New York, Defendants-Appellants-Appellees, Nicholas M. Cianciotto, Intervenors-Defendants- Appellants-Appellees
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 96 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“upon a relatively small, ascertainable group of non-minority persons.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““While we disapprove of a membership goal for the JAC, we affirm the use of such a goal with respect to overall membership in Local 28 and the apprenticeship program. As this court noted in Kirkland and Bridgeport Guardians, Inc., supra, an entry-level quota has a more diffuse and amorphous effect upon reverse discriminatees than a quota used to bump incumbents or hinder promotion of present members of the work force. An entry-level goal has less ascertainable effect since we cannot readily determine who it is that is being kept out. Accordingly, entry-level goals have less identifiable impact upon reverse discriminatees and are therefore less objectionable as temporary remedies.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“consistently and egregiously violated Title VII”
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.