Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 827 F.2d 163 - Lorance v. at Technologies, Inc.

Lorance v. at Technologies, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

827 F.2d 163 · 1987

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
October 2016
most recently cited

22 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2016 · most notably Lorance v. At&t Technologies, Inc. (1989), DeBruyne v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States (1990)

22 federal appellate ·

2001987199020002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

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 International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Delaware State College v. Ricks · United Air Lines, Inc. v. Evans · American Tobacco Co. v. Patterson · Cruz v. Hauck

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

  1. “facially-neutral but discriminatory seniority system[s]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “While the district court's failure to determine the nature of this action is problematic under rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure--which requires the district court to decide the question of class certification”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.