Harless v. Duck’s Empirical Analysis
619 F.2d 611 · 1980
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently June 2011 · most notably Brown v. Neeb (1981), Taylor v. Teletype Corp. (1981)
19 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 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. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Washington v. Davis · Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co.
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The burden of proof in a Title VII action shifts: first, plaintiff must establish a prima facie case by demonstrating disparate impact or disparate treatment; then, defendant can rebut by establishing a defense, such as, business necessity, for example, that the test bears a manifest relationship to successful and efficient job performance; finally plaintiff can establish liability, despite a valid defense, if an alternative selection device not creating the disparate impact can be proven.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“overwhelming evidence of pervasive discrimination in all aspects of [the employer's] internal employment practices,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The [selection procedure] related only to training performance at the police academy and not to actual job performance; consequently, it is deficient as a matter of law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gonzales v. Galvin
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.