Mary J. Riordan v. William L. Kempiners and Shirley Randolph’s Empirical Analysis
831 F.2d 690 · 1987
Citation profile
74 federal appellate · 9 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 201 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably Jones v. City of Chicago (1988), Shager v. Upjohn Co. (1990)
74 federal appellate · 9 district · 22 state decisions
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. § 203 · 29 U.S.C. § 206 (Equal Pay Act of 1963) · 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 (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Kentucky v. Graham · United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens · Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney · Castaneda v. Partida · Corning Glass Works v. Brennan
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 201 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] plaintiff's ability to prove discrimination indirectly, circumstantially, must not be crippled by evidentiary rulings that keep out probative evidence because of crabbed notions of relevance or excessive mistrust of juries.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The word 'employer' is defined broadly enough in the [FLSA] (of which the [EPA] is an amendment) to permit naming another employee rather than the employer as defendant, provided the defendant had supervisory authority over the complaining employee and was responsible in whole or part for the alleged violation.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“any person acting directly or indirectly in the interest of an employer in relation to an employee.”
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.