Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 769 F.2d 1215 - Matthews v. Allis-Chalmers

Matthews v. Allis-Chalmers’s Empirical Analysis

769 F.2d 1215 · 1985

Citation profile

93
cited by 93 later decisions
2
states following
March 2024
most recently cited

55 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably Dale v. Chicago Tribune Co. (1986), DeValk Lincoln Mercury, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co. (1987)

55 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

63019851990200020102020decided

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 29 U.S.C. § 216 · 29 U.S.C. § 626 (§ 7 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)

Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters · Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston · Loeb v. Textron, 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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “he was qualified to assume another position at the time of the discharge or demotion.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “) case such as Booker's, the plaintiff must show that (1) he was within the protected age group (over the age of 40); (2) he was performing according to his employer's legitimate expectations; (3) he was discharged (or demoted); and, (4) other similarly situated employees who were not in the protected class were treated more favorably (i.e., not discharged,”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “'not required to evaluate every conceivable inference which can be drawn from evidentiary matter, but only reasonable ones.'”
    4 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.