Hill v. Spiegel, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
708 F.2d 233 · 1983
Citation profile
78 federal appellate · 9 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 141 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2019 · most notably Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. E Schleier B (1995), Jacklyn v. Schering-Plough Healthcare Products Sales Corp. (1999)
78 federal appellate · 9 district · 6 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 29 U.S.C. § 260 · 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 626 (§ 7 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)
Relies on Continental Ore Company v. Union Carbide and Carbon Corporation · Brady v. Southern Railway Co. · Rice v. Norman Williams Co. · Rodriguez v. United States · Dayton Board of Education v. Brinkman
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 141 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] statement is not hearsay if ... [t]he statement is offered against a party and is ... a statement by his agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of his agency or employment, made during the existence of the relationship.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“may be granted only if, viewing the admissible evidence most favorable to the party opposing the motion, a reasonable trier of fact could draw only one conclusion.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he mere fact that each of [the declarants] was a 'manager' ... is clearly insufficient to establish that matters bearing upon [plaintiff's] discharge were within the scope of their employment”
3 later decisions 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.