Sharkey v. Lasmo (Aul Ltd.)’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Johnson v. United States · Ford Motor Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t|he trial judge, exercising a mature judicial discretion, should view the verdict in the overall setting of the trial; consider the character of the evidence and the complexity or simplicity of the legal principles which the jury was bound to apply to the facts; and abstain from interfering with the verdict unless it is quite clear that the jury has reached a seriously erroneous result. The judge’s duty is essentially to see that there is no miscarriage of justice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Nadel v. Isaksson
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.