Swint v. Pullman-Standard’s Empirical Analysis
539 F.2d 77 · 1976
Citation profile
57 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 95 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2017 · most notably International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States (1977), Pullman-Standard v. Swint (1982)
57 federal appellate · 1 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Foman v. Davis · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co. · Magna Oil Corp. v. Bateson
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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If there ever was a time of facile Title VII litigation, it surely ended with the demise of intentional violations of equal employment opportunity. Today’s parade of Title VII cases present more and more subtle manifestations of discrimination. Proof of invidious practices becomes more difficult as the ability to separate the real violation from the unfounded suspicion grows harder. This is especially so since many employers and unions * * * have made substantial good faith efforts toward eliminating racial distinctions for the work force.” 2”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The most important aspect of determining whether a prima facie case has been proven is to identify the proper scope of the evidentiary examination. The authorities speaking to this scope all conclude that the question should be whether the class has established a history of broad patterns of plant-wide racially discriminatory departmental assignments.” Supra at 93. The Court in Swint went on to say that: “. . . the prior history of discriminatory job class assignments is clearly relevant to the issue of whether the present discrepancies in departmental assignments were part and parcel of a broad scheme to treat black and white workers differently.” Supra at 97.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A finding of no vacancies in these departments would support a conclusion that no entitlement to backpay existed, as would a finding that all vacancies were filled by more senior discriminatees.”
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.