Van Meter v. Barr’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 21 district ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Bradley v. School Board of City of Richmond · Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital · Brown v. General Services Administration · Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. v. Bonjorno · United States Fidelity Guaranty Company v. United States
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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“According to section 102(a) of the Act, ‘complaining parties’ may seek compensatory and — in suits against private employers — punitive damages. Section 102(d) defines a ‘complaining party’ as ‘the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Attorney General, or a person who may bring an action or proceeding under title VII.... ’ By its terms, the statute seems to contemplate that only plaintiffs who have not yet brought their actions are entitled to invoke the new Act.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]n Title VII cases against the federal government, the United States has conditioned the waiver of its sovereign immunity on the requirement that the plaintiff first raise his or her discrimination grievances with the agen-cy_ Accordingly, to allow Title VII plaintiffs simply to tack claims for compensatory damages onto complaints already pending in U.S. District Courts would, as a practical matter, deprive the United States of its opportunity to resolve claims for monetary damages at the administrative level, and would, as a legal matter, impermissibly broaden the jurisdiction of the federal courts to include claims that, contrary to the limited scope of the federal government’s waiver of sovereign immunity in this area, had not followed the administrative track still required by Title VII as a perquisite to judicial action in federal employment cases.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) Right of Recovery.— (1) Civil Rights. — In an action brought by a complaining party under [Title VII] against a respondent who engaged in unlawful intentional discrimination ... the complaining party may recover compensatory damages.... (c) Jury Trial. If a complaining party seeks compensatory or punitive damages under this section— (1) any party may demand a trial by jury....”
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.