Stoller v. Marsh’s Empirical Analysis
682 F.2d 971 · 1982
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 20 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably Quinn v. Green Tree Credit Corp. (1998), Lambert v. Genesee Hospital (1993)
25 federal appellate · 20 district · 3 state decisions
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 Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. · Delaware State College v. Ricks · United Air Lines, Inc. v. Evans · Ratchford v. Gay Lib · Mary P. Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., Air Line Pilots Association, Non-Aligned Party. Mary P. Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., Air Line Pilots Association, Non-Aligned Party
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under Title VII, if an employee did not at the time know or have reason to know that an employment decision was discriminatory in nature, the time limits for filing an administrative complaint may be tolled.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If established procedures have given an employee a reasonable opportunity to inspect the supervisory evaluations in his or her file, to challenge allegedly inaccurate materials, and to have such materials corrected or removed, and if the organization gives its employees adequate notice that these rights may be exercised, then it may rely in good faith on such evaluations in making subsequent decisions without violating Title VII.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“When a supervisor ... deliberately places an inaccurate, discriminatory evaluation into an employee's file, he intends to cause harm to the employee.... [T]he employer — that is, the organization as a whole — cannot escape Title VII liability simply because the final decisionmaker was not personally motivated by discrimination.”
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.