Powers v. Dole’s Empirical Analysis
782 F.2d 689 · 1986
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 95 later decisions — most recently March 2011 · most notably Beard v. Whitley County REMC (1988), Holland v. Jefferson National Life Insurance (1989)
41 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · United States v. Diebold, Inc. · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.
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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Title VII cases, we approach the application of these principles with a special caution. Summary judgment is infrequently an appropriate resolution. The factual issues presented in such litigation, including the issue of discriminatory intent which is often proven by circumstantial evidence, cannot often be resolved on summary judgment. However, even when such issues of motive or intent are at stake, summary judgment is proper “where the plaintiff presents no indications of motive and intent supportive of his position.””
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“summary judgment is proper 'where the plaintiff presents no indication of motive or intent supportive of his position.' " Powers, 782 F.2d at 694 (quoting Munson v. Friske, 754 F.2d 683 , 690 (7th Cir.1985)). We must, however, approach the question of summary judgment with "special caution”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“On a summary judgment motion, when a party seeks to offer evidence through exhibits, they must be identified by affidavit or otherwise be admissible.”
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.