Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 770 F.2d 719 - Smith v. Monsanto Chemical Co.

Smith v. Monsanto Chemical Co.’s Empirical Analysis

770 F.2d 719 · 1985

Citation profile

88
cited by 88 later decisions
3
states following
February 2022
most recently cited

43 federal appellate · 9 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably Mitchell v. Toledo Hospital (1992), Holifield v. Reno (1997)

43 federal appellate · 9 district · 5 state decisions

40019851990200020102020decided

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. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 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 · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens · Johnson v. Bunny Bread Co.

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

  1. “similarly situated in all relevant respects”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'all the evidence points one way and is susceptible of no reasonable inferences sustaining [Grogg's] position.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “rule, the number of days they remained absent before returning to work, the nature or severity of their medical conditions, or the extent to which their medical conditions were corroborated by independent, medical documentation. Moreover, the evidence in this case indicates that Williams may have falsified his medical records, a circumstance not shown by Williams to exist in other cases of reinstatement of Caucasian persons. 14 In sum, non-discriminatory factors could have accounted for Ford's different treatment of its employees who violated the”
    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.