Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 654 F.2d 1370 - Owens v. Rush

Owens v. Rush’s Empirical Analysis

654 F.2d 1370 · 1981

Citation profile

122
cited by 122 later decisions
4
states following
August 2021
most recently cited

50 federal appellate · 21 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 122 later decisions — most recently August 2021 · most notably Meade v. Grubbs (1988), Clark v. Tarrant County (1986)

50 federal appellate · 21 district · 5 state decisions

50019811990200020102020decided

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 Conley v. Gibson · Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois · Perry v. Sindermann

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

  1. “Congress intended for the personal staff exception to apply only to those individuals who are in highly intimate and sensitive positions of responsibility on the staff of the elected official.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “looked to the nature and circumstances of the employment relationship between the complaining individual and the elected official to see if the exception applie[d],”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Considering the nature of the Undersheriff's position and the close working relationship required to perform effectively in the position, we must conclude that plaintiff was in the type of job which Congress intended to be within the personal staff exception of Sec. 2000e(f) and thus outside Title VII coverage.”
    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.