Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 708 F.2d 1312 - Bell v. Bolger

Bell v. Bolger’s Empirical Analysis

708 F.2d 1312 · 1983

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
3
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 6 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably Garrett v. Hewlett-Packard Co. (2002), Holmes v. Bevilacqua (1986)

27 federal appellate · 6 district · 3 state decisions

3701983199020002010decided

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. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 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 Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens · Pullman-Standard v. Swint · Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters

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

  1. “subjective promotion procedures are to be closely scrutinized because of their susceptibility to discriminatory abuse.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “[t]he burden of establishing a prima facie case of disparate treatment is not onerous.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “The fourth McDonnell Douglas factor might well be modified in promotion cases to require a plaintiff to show that “other employees of similar qualifications who were not members of a protected group were promoted at the time the plaintiffs request for promotion was denied,” ... but appellee’s argument that more is required is in error.”
    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.