Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. City of Altoona’s Empirical Analysis
723 F.2d 4 · 1983
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 623 (§ 4 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)
Relies on National League of Cities v. Usery · Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Wyoming · Tisdale v. United States · In re Disbarment of Kleindienst · Markham Et Al. v. Geller
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“seniority is in section 11 inexorably linked with age, and cannot be viewed as a separate factor.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If for reasons of economy ... it shall be deemed necessary by any borough to reduce the number of paid employees of the police or fire force, then such borough shall apply the following procedure: (i) if there are any employes eligible for retirement under the terms of any retirement or pension law ... then such reduction in numbers shall be made by the retirement of such employes, starting with the oldest employe and following in order of age respectively, (ii) if the number of paid employes in the police force or fire force eligible to retirement is insufficient to effect the necessary reduction in numbers, or if there are no persons eligible for retirement, or if no retirement or pension fund exists, then the reduction shall be effected by furloughing the person or persons, including probationers, last appointed to the respective force. Such removal shall be accomplished by furloughing in numerical order commencing with the person last appointed_ (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The City attempts to justify the instant involuntary retirements, which plainly are on the basis of age, because of pension eligibility. It is well settled, however, that mere eligibility for a pension is not a defense to a prima facie case of age discrimination ... The city's contention that the retirements were based on economic considerations is equally meritless, for such considerations cannot be used to justify age discrimination.”
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.