Hornsby v. Conoco, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
777 F.2d 243 · 1985
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 6 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably Simms v. Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services (1999), Douglass v. United Services Automobile Ass'n (1996)
22 federal appellate · 6 district · 4 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 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on United Air Lines, Inc. v. Evans · The Boeing Company v. Daniel C. Shipman · Stafford v. Oklahoma · Sanchez v. Standard Brands, Inc. · Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Lyman Lamb 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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he single fact that a plaintiff is replaced by someone within the protected class does not negate the possibility that the discharge was motivated [by] discriminatory reasons.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“generalized testimony by an employee regarding his subjective belief that his discharge was the result of age discrimination is insufficient to make an issue for the jury in the face of proof showing an adequate, nondiscriminatory reason for his discharge”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]e cannot allow subjective belief to be the basis for judicial relief when an adequate nondiscriminatory reason for the discharge has been presented”
3 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.