Carroll v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.’s Empirical Analysis
708 F.2d 183 · 1983
Citation profile
45 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2017 · most notably Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust (1988), Waltman v. International Paper Co. (1989)
45 federal appellate · 2 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 Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Pullman-Standard v. Swint · Hazelwood School District v. United States
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The use of subjective criteria to evaluate employees in hiring and job placement decisions is not within the category of facially neutral procedures to which the disparate impact model is applied.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“historical, individual, or circumstantial evidence.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The causal requirement [of Title VII] recognizes that underrepresentation of blacks might result from any number of factors, and it places an initial burden on the plaintiff to show that the specific factor challenged under the disparate impact model results in the discriminatory impact.”
2 later decisions 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.