Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 763 F.2d 1366 - Morrison v. Booth

Morrison v. Booth’s Empirical Analysis

763 F.2d 1366 · 1985

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
1
states following
January 2019
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 6 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably Gafford v. General Electric Co. (1993), Carter v. Three Springs Residential Treatment (1998)

13 federal appellate · 6 district · 3 state decisions

2401985199020002010decided

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 · Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin · General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon · Goldstein v. Manhattan Industries, Inc.

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

  1. “It [the district court] correctly concluded ... that while plaintiffs need not prove the merits of their claims at this [class certification] stage, they must provide more than bare allegations that they satisfy the requirements of Rule 23 for class certification. Plaintiffs must show some nexus with the alleged class. See Waller [sic] v. The Jim Dandy Co., 638 F.2d 1330 (5th Cir.1981).... Plaintiffs simply leap from the premise that they were the victims of discrimination to the position that others must also have been.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[w]hether a prima facie case has been shown is a fact question. The test is 'whether an ordinary person could reasonably infer discrimination from the facts shown if those facts remain unrebutted.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “leap from the premise that they were the victims of discrmination to the position that others must also have been”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.