Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 801 F.2d 709 - Pecker v. Heckler

Pecker v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis

801 F.2d 709 · 1986

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
August 2007
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 8 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently August 2007 · most notably Diamond v. Atwood (1995), Laber v. Harvey (2006)

21 federal appellate · 8 district ·

220198619902000decided

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) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co. · Weatherford v. Bursey · Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. · Patterson v. American Tobacco 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[w]e think that the defendants are bound by the EEOC's findings of discrimination and retaliation.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “require that the district courts enforce final EEOC decisions favorable to federal employees....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “supporting his position. Aplt. Br. at 26. In Pecker, the plaintiff, who succeeded in obtaining a finding of discrimination by the EEOC, brought a civil action asking the court to expand the relief awarded by the EEOC. The issue arose whether the plaintiff was entitled to a court order affirming the EEOC's finding of discrimination. In a footnote, the court answered the question in the affirmative, noting first that the issue was not placed squarely before the district court in the first place and stating that”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.