Rogero v. Noone’s Empirical Analysis
704 F.2d 518 · 1983
Citation profile
65 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably United States v. Jernigan (2003), Avirgan v. Hull (1991)
65 federal appellate · 1 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 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Wilson v. Taylor · Harris v. Plastics Manufacturing Co. · Owens v. Rush · Vulcan Society of Westchester County v. Fire Department of White Plains
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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he [plaintiff] insists that [the Tax Collector], as an agent, is a proper defendant, thereby precluding the necessity of suing the county as well. To support this contention, [plaintiff] relies heavily on Owens v. Rush, 636 F.2d 283 (10th Cir.1980). In Owens , the court held that a sheriff who employed fewer than fifteen persons was an agent for the county and therefore an employer for Title VII purposes. The critical distinction between that case and [the] one before us is that in Owens , the plaintiff named not only the sheriff, but also the Board of County Commissioners and other political bodies as codefendants. Likewise, in Vulcan Society v. Fire Department of White Plains, 82 F.R.D. 379 (S.D.N.Y. 1979), which held a district fire commission an agent of the city for Title VII purposes, both entities were parties to the suit. By contrast, in Aguilera v. Cook County Merit Board, 21 F.E.P. 731 [ 1979 WL 49 ] (N.D.Ill.1979), the court did permit a Title VII suit against the county Police and Corrections Merit Board even though the county itself was not named in the complaint. That decision appears to be a minority view. The [plaintiff] has cited no binding precedent to support her position. Taken as a whole, [plaintiffs] argument is logically inconsistent. She relies on the agency relationship for purposes of numerosity but denies it, in essence, with respect to liability. Despite the fact that jurisdiction depends on the “borrowed” manpower strength of the county, the [p”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“engaged in an industry affecting commerce who has fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he terms of employment such as pay, hours, and benefits are fixed by the [state or political subdivision] rather than the [defendant institution].’ Other facts ... would be the source of funds for salaries and wages, whether the employees of the two parties have a common pension fund, and whether the employees are subject to a common civil service employment and grievance policy.”
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.