Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 817 F.2d 931 - Fields v. Clark University

Fields v. Clark University’s Empirical Analysis

817 F.2d 931 · 1987

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 9 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2013 · most notably Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (1989), Lipsett v. University of Puerto Rico (1988)

27 federal appellate · 9 district · 7 state decisions

2501987199020002010decided

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 (§ 703 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 · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Vandygriff v. Phillips

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

  1. “First, the plaintiff has the burden of proving by the preponderance of the evidence a prima facie case of discrimination. Second, if the plaintiff succeeds in proving the prima facie case, the burden shifts to the defendant “to articulate some legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the employee’s rejection.” Third, should the defendant carry this burden, the plaintiff must then have an opportunity to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the legitimate reasons offered by the defendant were not its true reasons, but were a pretext for discrimination.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[W]hen a plaintiff has proved by direct evidence, not inference, that “unlawful discrimination was a motivating factor in an employment decision,” there is a greater burden on the employer. The latter must then "prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the same decision would have been made absent the discrimination.” "Otherwise, the employer must merely articulate a plausible, nondiscriminatory reason for rejecting the plaintiff.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the logic of such an approach is inescapable [because] the employer is in the best position to prove which of its motives was determinative.”
    2 later decisions 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.