Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 685 F. Supp. 260 - Matzo v. Postmaster General

685 F. Supp. 260 - Matzo v. Postmaster General’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
states following
October 2011
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently October 2011 · most notably Tyndall v. National Education Centers, Inc. (1994), Carr v. Reno 92-5115 (1994)

6 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions

2101987199020002010decided

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. § 701 (Employment Opportunities for Individuals With Disabilities Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 794

Relies on Southeastern Community College v. Davis · Doe v. New York University · Keithley Edwards v. Born, Inc. Appeal of Keithley Edwards and Edith Edwards · 642 F. Supp. 481 - Wimbley v. Bolger · Norcross v. Sneed

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

  1. “cases cited by the [defendants] enforcing settlement agreements negotiated by attorneys over objection of a client all reflect a crucial distinction: in each there is proof that the client initially authorized a settlement upon terms offered (or terms left to the discretion of counsel), or that the client initially approved of a proposed settlement and later had a change of mind.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A handicapped employee cannot dictate the measure of his employer's duty to accommodate . . . even if [the employee's demand], too, might have been reasonable”
    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.