Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 666 F. Supp. 1223 - Grabb v. Bendix Corp.

666 F. Supp. 1223 - Grabb v. Bendix Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
January 2012
most recently cited

1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 2012

1 district · 2 state decisions

301986199020002010decided

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 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 623 (§ 4 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States

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

  1. “(1) the company's reasons have no basis in fact; or (2) if they have a basis in fact, by showing that they were not really motivating factors; or (3) if they are factors, by showing they were jointly insufficient to motivate the adverse employment decision, le.g.], the proffered reason was so removed in time that it was unlikely to be the cause or the proffered reason applied to other employee[s] with equal or greater force and the company made a different decision with respect to them.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.