Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 644 F.2d 1077 - Cooper v. Lewis

Cooper v. Lewis’s Empirical Analysis

644 F.2d 1077 · 1981

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
September 2014
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2014 · most notably Espinoza v. Missouri Pacific Railroad (1985), Bernstein Seawell & Kove v. Bosarge (1987)

12 federal appellate · 1 district ·

1801981199020002010decided

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 Link v. Wabash Railroad · Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co. · General Electric Co. v. Gilbert · Smith v. Ayer · Harold FRANKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, Johnny Lee, Intervenor-Appellant, v. BOWMAN TRANSPORTATION COMPANY Et Al., Defendants-Appellees

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

  1. “is considered to have 'notice of all facts, notice of which can be charged upon the attorney.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Congress did not intend to condition a claimant's right to sue under Title VII on fortuitous circumstances or events beyond his control which are not spelled out in the statute.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[s]ubsequent litigation has made clear that Franks did not unconditionally reject the constructive notice doctrine for all circumstances in Title VII litigation,”
    1 later decision 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.