Bundy v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
641 F.2d 934 · 1981
Citation profile
165 federal appellate · 138 district · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 484 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2019 · most notably Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson (1986), Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth (1998)
165 federal appellate · 138 district · 37 state decisions — followed in 14 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 · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · United States v. W. T. Grant Co. · Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters
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 484 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment,”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Adjusting the McDonnell formula cases of discriminatory refusal to promote is relatively simple. Thus to make out a prima facie case the plaintiff must show that she belongs to a protected group, that she was qualified for and applied for a promotion, that she was considered for and denied the promotion, and that other employees of similar qualifications who were not members of the protected group were indeed promoted at the time the plaintiff's request for promotion was denied.”
14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“adjusted] the McDonnell formula to Bundy’s claim as follows: To establish a prima facie case of illegal denial of promotion in retaliation against the plaintiff’s refusal of sexual advances by her supervisors, the plaintiff must show (1) that she was a victim of a pattern or practice of sexual harassment attributable to her employer (Bundy has, of course, already shown this); and (2) that she applied for and was denied a promotion for which she was technically eligible and of which she had a reasonable expection.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.