Segar v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
738 F.2d 1249 · 1984
Citation profile
126 federal appellate · 51 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 269 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2020 · most notably Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust (1988), Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio (1989)
126 federal appellate · 51 district · 4 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) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 704 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 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody
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 269 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he bare articulation of a nondiscriminatory explanation, while sufficient to rebut an individual plaintiffs low-threshold McDonnell Douglas showing, generally will not suffice as a rebuttal to a typical class-wide showing of pervasive discrimination.... in both individual and class action contexts the defendant faces the same rebuttal burden; it must present sufficient evidence to permit the trier of fact to decline to draw the inference of discrimination from the plaintiffs’ proof. But in the class action pattern or practice case the strength of the evidence sufficient to meet this rebuttal burden will typically need to be much higher than the strength of the evidence sufficient to rebut an individual plaintiffs low-threshold McDonnell Douglas showing.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The ultimate burden of persuading the trier of fact that the defendant intentionally discriminated against the plaintiff remains at all times with the plaintiff.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“both the methodology and the explanatory power of the statistical analysis must be sufficient to permit an inference of discrimination.”
5 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.