Shidaker v. Carlin’s Empirical Analysis
782 F.2d 746 · 1986
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 39 U.S.C. § 409 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · Washington v. Davis
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[n]ot every ex parte communication is a procedural defect so substantial and so likely to cause prejudice that it entitles the claimant to an entirely new ... proceeding.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We are unconcerned with whether, absent the [procedural error], Koenigs would have reached the same decision to demote Shidakur. The test is not whether the procedural defect caused actual prejudice to the rights of the party before the court. The test is an objective one, whether the particular procedural defect is so substantial and so likely to cause prejudice that no claimant can fairly be required to be subjected to adverse action under such a flawed proceeding.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Defendants may rebut a statistical prima facie showing of disparate impact with statistical evidence of their own....”
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.