Candelario v. Postmaster General’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 701 (Employment Opportunities for Individuals With Disabilities Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. · Commissioner v. Sunnen · Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“must receive a sum of money equal to what would have been earned by the discriminatee in the employment lost through discrimination ... less what was actually earned from other employment during the period, after normal expenses incurred in seeking and holding the interim employment have been deducted....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he interests of fairness, judicial economy, and enforcement of repose prohibit the defendant from collaterally attacking the EEOC award in the present proceeding.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“'[a] final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action.'”
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.