Mohammed v. Callaway’s Empirical Analysis
698 F.2d 395 · 1983
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 25 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably Simms v. Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services (1999), Randle v. City of Aurora (1995)
36 federal appellate · 25 district · 4 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
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 · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Huffman v. Florida
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The required qualifications and experience set out in the job opportunity announcement included a bachelor’s or higher degree in engineering, three years of professional experience in engineering, and supervisory experience. Dyer testified that he did not have an engineering degree. When asked at trial why he applied for the position when he lacked an engineering degree, Dyer replied, “It was an opportunity to see if I could get ahead.” .... In sum, the record as a whole does not support the district court’s finding that both candidates were amply qualified. More importantly, when an employer rejects a minority candidate in choosing between competing individuals, the critical determination is whether they are equally qualified. Burdine, 450 U.S. at 259 , 101 S.Ct. at 1096 . This record does not permit a finding that Dyer’s qualifications were equal to those of Mohammed. An employer “has discretion to choose among equally qualified candidates, provided the decision is not based upon unlawful criteria.” Burdine, 450 U.S. at 259 , 101 S.Ct. at 1097 (emphasis added). Here the candidates were not equally qualified, and Mohammed offered undisputed evidence supporting an inference of pretext, including reliance in part upon subjective evaluations, serious procedural irregularities, cancellation of the first job announcement after he had applied, statistical evidence of the complete lack of minority supervisors, and affirmative action programs adopted but not implemented. Based on ou”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Walker v. Potter · Plotke v. White“the use of subjective factors supports an inference of pretext when an employer justifies rejection of a minority candidate on the basis of such factors even though the minority is objectively better qualified than the non-minority chosen.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[e]vidence that an employer has misjudged the qualifications of candidates is probative of whether the employer's reasons are pretexts for 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.