Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 813 F.2d 893 - Johnson v. Legal Services of Arkansas, Inc.

Johnson v. Legal Services of Arkansas, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

813 F.2d 893 · 1987

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
July 2015
most recently cited

35 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2015 · most notably 133 S. Ct. 2517 - University of Tex. Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar (2013), Dartmouth Review v. Dartmouth College (1989)

35 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

2701987199020002010decided

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 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 704 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2996F

Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.

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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A prima facie case of discrimination consists of proof that the plaintiff is a member of a protected class, and that an adverse employment action was taken against the plaintiff in circumstances from which an inference of unlawful discrimination arises, [citations omitted] An inference of discrimination is commonly raised in these cases by proving disparate treatment. A plaintiff proves disparate treatment by showing that he was treated less favorably than similarly situated employees who are not in plaintiff’s protected class.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “once a plaintiff establishes that a discriminatory consideration played some part in an employment decision adverse to [him], he has established a Title VII violation and is entitled to limited relief.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Should the court find that retaliation played some invidious part in the [plaintiff's] termination, a violation of Title VII will be established under Bibbs .”
    2 later decisions 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.