Mitchell v. Baldrige’s Empirical Analysis
759 F.2d 80 · 1985
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 217 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 304 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Holcomb v. Powell (2006), Regina C. Brown, v. Kenneth D. Brody, Chairman, Export-Import Bank of the United States, (1999)
41 federal appellate · 217 district · 8 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)
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens · Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters
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 304 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The causal connection component of the prima facie case may be established by showing that the employer had knowledge of the employee's protected activity, and that the adverse personnel action took place shortly after that activity.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) that he engaged in a statutorily protected activity; (2) that the employer took an adverse personnel action; and (3) that a causal connection existed between the two. As in a case of disparate treatment, this initial burden is not great. Plaintiff merely needs to establish facts adequate to permit an inference of retaliatory motive .... The causal connection of the prima facie case may be established by showing that the employer had knowledge of the employee’s protected activity, and that the adverse personnel action took place shortly after that activity.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"[0]nce a Title VII case has been ‘fully tried on the merits,' the question whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case ‘is no longer relevant.' ... The High Court has admonished lower courts not to make the inquiry into the ultimate question of fact ‘even more difficult by applying legal rules which were devised to govern "the allocation of burdens and order of presentation of proof.” Mitchell v. Baldrige, 759 F.2d 80, 83-84 (D.C.Cir.1985) (quoting United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens, 460 U.S. 711, 715-16 , 103 S.Ct. 1478, 1481-82 , 75 L.Ed.2d 403 (1983) (quoting Burdine, 450 U.S. at 252 , 101 S.Ct. at 1093 )).”
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.