← 552 F.2d 1277 - Robert FLOWERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CROUCH-WALKER CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee

Robert FLOWERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CROUCH-WALKER CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee’s Empirical Analysis

552 F.2d 1277 · 1977

Citation profile

250

cited by 250 later decisions

cited 1 times by the Supreme Court

states following

February 2012

most recently cited

119 federal appellate · 18 district · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 250 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2012 · most notably Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson (1986), Henson v. City of Dundee (1982)

119 federal appellate · 18 district · 23 state decisions — followed in 12 states

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 · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co. · United Housing Foundation, Inc. v. Forman

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 250 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“'his performance was of sufficient quality to merit continued employment, thereby raising an inference that some other factor was involved in the decision to discharge him.'”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Powell v. Syracuse University · Wade v. New York Telephone Co.
“articulate some legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Williams v. Bell · Sherkow v. Wisconsin, Department of Public Instruction
“1) that he belongs to a racial minority; 2) that he was qualified for the job he was performing; 3) that he was satisfying the normal requirements in his work; 4) that he was discharged; and 5) that after his discharge the employer assigned those who were not members of plaintiff's racial minority to perform the same work.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. 621 F. Supp. 679 - Ziering v. NY CITY DEPT. OF HEALTH · 621 F. Supp. 679 - Ziering v. New York City Department of Health

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.