Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 681 So. 2d 310 - Gray v. Russell Corp.

681 So. 2d 310 - Gray v. Russell Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
July 2011
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 2011

1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

60199620002010decided

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. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon

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

  1. “plaintiff—once the employer produces sufficient evidence to support a nondiscriminatory explanation for its decision—must be afforded the `opportunity to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the legitimate reasons offered by the defendant were not its true reasons, but were a pretext for discrimination'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. 911 So. 2d 171 - DCFS v. Garcia
  2. “hearing officer's finding that there was no discriminatory intent in the discharge of [employees] is supported by competent, substantial evidence, and was not based on erroneous applications of the law”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. 911 So. 2d 171 - DCFS v. Garcia
  3. “acceptance or rejection of expert testimony is a matter within the sound discretion of the lower tribunal, and such decision will not be overturned on appeal absent a showing of abuse of discretion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. 940 So. 2d 466 - Doctors Co. v. State, Dept. of Ins.

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.