Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 692 SO2D 833 - Abbey v. Sverdrup Corp.

Abbey v. Sverdrup Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
2
states following
September 2009
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 704 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co. · Sanchez v. Standard Brands, Inc. · 295 F. Supp. 943 - King v. Georgia Power Company · Abbey v. Sverdrup Corp.

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

  1. “A charge of discrimination is not filed as a preliminary to a lawsuit. On the contrary, the purpose of a charge of discrimination is to trigger the investigatory and conciliatory procedures of the EEOC. Once the charge has been filed, the Commission carries out its investigatory function and attempts to obtain voluntary compliance with the law. Only if the EEOC fails to achieve voluntary compliance will the matter ever be the subject of court action.”
    1 later decision 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.