Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 823 F.2d 218 - Foster v. Wyrick

Foster v. Wyrick’s Empirical Analysis

823 F.2d 218 · 1987

Citation profile

60
cited by 60 later decisions
5
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 10 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Wb Ej Ej v. Matula, Rural Water System 1 v. City of Sioux Center (1997)

19 federal appellate · 10 district · 6 state decisions

3101987199020002010decided

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. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Washington v. Davis · Maine v. Thiboutot · Middlesex County Sewerage Authority v. National Sea Clammers Assn.

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

  1. “Proof of discriminatory racial purpose is required to establish an equal protection violation.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]t is true that a § 985(3) remedy would not be coextensive with Title VII, since a plaintiff in an action under § 1985(3) must prove both a conspiracy and a group animus that Title VII does not require. While this incomplete eongruity would limit the damage that would be done to Title VII, it would not eliminate it. Unimpaired effectiveness can be given to the plan put together by Congress in Title VII only by holding that deprivation of a right created by Title VII cannot be the basis for a cause of action under § 1985(3).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A]ppellant's allegation that MSP's employment practices and procedures have a discriminatory impact on black inmates fails to state a cause of action under the Equal Protection Clause, because there is no allegation of intentional discrimination.”
    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.