Parker v. Mississippi State Department of Public Welfare’s Empirical Analysis
811 F.2d 925 · 1987
Citation profile
19 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently February 2010 · most notably Johnston v. Harris County Flood Control District (1989), Brock v. Mr. W Fireworks, Inc. (1987)
19 federal appellate ·
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 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 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 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Pullman-Standard v. Swint · Bullock 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““specific consideration of these alternate remedies [including a § 1981 claim] for employment discrimination is necessary only if their violation can be made out on grounds different from those available under Title YII. See Watson v. Ft. Worth Bank & Trust, 798 F.2d 791 , 794 n. 4, (5th Cir.1986) 7 ; Rivera v. City of Wichita Falls, 665 F.2d 531 , 534 n. 4 (5th Cir.1982); Whiting v. Jackson State University, 616 F.2d 116 (5th Cir.1980). Because Parker has not asserted any such distinction here, we give specific consideration only to her Title VII claim.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The flaw was in the procedure by which that judgment was arrived at: by generally delegating the conducting of jury trials to officials not authorized to do such work without consent of the parties and by the district judges [sic] adopting as his own the product of that improper process.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“holds that the failure to obtain the parties' consent is a procedural rather than jurisdictional defect, regardless of whether the reference is pursuant to 636(b)(3) or 636(c)”
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.