Mooney v. Aramco Services Co.’s Empirical Analysis
54 F.3d 1207 · 1995
Citation profile
82 federal appellate · 50 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 355 later decisions — most recently January 2021 · most notably Rachid v. Jack in Box, Inc. (2004), Alexander v. Fulton County (2000)
82 federal appellate · 50 district · 11 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 29 U.S.C. § 216 · 29 U.S.C. § 626 (§ 7 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins · Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston · Santoni v. United States
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 355 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“At this stage, the court has much more information on which to base its decision, and makes a factual determination on the similarly situated question. If the claimants are similarly situated, the district court allows the representative action to proceed to trial. If the claimants are not similarly situated, the district court decertifies the class, and the opt-in plaintiffs are dismissed without prejudice. The class representatives— i.e. the original plaintiffs — proceed to trial on their individual claims.”
30 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'require[s] nothing more than substantial allegations that the putative class members were together the victims of a single decision, policy, or plan.'”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) disparate factual and employment settings of the individual plaintiffs; (2) the various defenses available to defendant[s] [that] appear to be individual to each plaintiff; [and] (3) fairness and procedural considerations”
7 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.