Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 738 F.2d 1107 - Martinez v. Orr

Martinez v. Orr’s Empirical Analysis

738 F.2d 1107 · 1984

Citation profile

151
cited by 151 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

83 federal appellate · 29 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 151 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs (1991), Doe ex rel. Doe v. St. Joseph's Hospital of Fort Wayne (1986)

83 federal appellate · 29 district · 7 state decisions

6301984199020002010decided

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) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. · Brown v. General Services Administration · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Baldwin County Welcome Center v. Brown · Commissioner v. Engle

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

  1. “[T]he time limits ... will be tolled only where the circumstances of the case rise to a level of ‘active deception’ sufficient to invoke the powers of equity. For instance, equitable tolling may be appropriate where a plaintiff has been ‘lulled into inaction by her past employer, state or federal agencies, or the courts.’ Likewise, if a plaintiff is ‘actively misled,’ or ‘has in some extraordinary way been prevented from asserting his or her rights,’ we will permit tolling of the limitations period.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “For instance, equitable tolling may be appropriate where a plaintiff has been 'lulled into inaction by her past employer, state or federal agencies, or the courts.'”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the time limits contained in Title VII will be tolled only where the circumstances of the case rise to a level of 'active deception'”
    3 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.