Reed v. Lockheed Aircraft Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
613 F.2d 757 · 1980
Citation profile
76 federal appellate · 9 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 140 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Mack v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. (1989), Lisa L. Fitzgerald v. William Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (2001)
76 federal appellate · 9 district · 5 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 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters · United Air Lines, Inc. v. Evans · Teamsters Local Union 657 v. Rodriguez · Rich v. Martin Marietta Corp.
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 140 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“are but evidence that a policy of discrimination pervaded Lockheed's personnel decisions. The violations of which she complains occurred each day of her employment, including the days within the appropriate limitations period.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] refusal to hire or a decision to fire an employee may place the victim out of reach of any further effect of company policy, so that such a complainant must file a charge within the requisite time period after the refusal to hire or termination, or be time-barred. If in those cases the victims can show no way in which the company policy had an impact on them within the limitations period, the continuing violation doctrine is of no assistance or applicability, because mere “continuing impact from past violations is not actionable. Continuing violations are.””
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] challenge to systematic discrimination is always timely if brought by a present employee, for the existence of the system deters the employee from seeking his full employment rights or threatens to adversely affect him in the future.”
3 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.