Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 773 F.2d 1429 - Wilhelm v. Blue Bell, Inc.

Wilhelm v. Blue Bell, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

773 F.2d 1429 · 1985

Citation profile

97
cited by 97 later decisions
3
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

53 federal appellate · 6 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 97 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Mauzy v. Kelly Services, Inc. (1996), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Clay Printing Co. (1992)

53 federal appellate · 6 district · 6 state decisions

46019851990200020102020decided

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. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 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 · Bradley v. School Board of City of Richmond · Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston · United States v. Schooner Peggy

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

  1. “absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'but for' [Rockville's] motive to discriminate ... he would not have been terminated.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “may weigh evidence and assess credibility in ruling on a motion for a new trial.”
    2 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.