Lucas v. Dole’s Empirical Analysis
835 F.2d 532 · 1987
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently November 2015 · most notably Mastro v. Potomac Electric Power Co. (2006), Charles A. Iadimarco v. Marvin T. Runyon, Postmaster General (1999)
5 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 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 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 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 · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens · McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co.
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Title VII prohibits racial discrimination against the white petitioners in this case upon the same standards as would be applicable were they Negroes”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The present case also involves “reverse discrimination;” a member of the white majority is alleging racial discrimination. The Supreme Court has held that Title VII protects whites as well as minorities. McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transp. Co., 427 U.S. 273 , 96 S.Ct. 2574 , 49 L.Ed.2d 493 (1976). Although the D.C. Circuit has imposed a higher prima facie burden on majority plaintiffs, we expressly decline to decide at this time whether a higher burden applies. The similarity of the burden imposed under Holmes [infra ] and that imposed by the D.C. Circuit in reverse discrimination cases makes it unnecessary to reach this issue in this case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]hite males, who as a group historically have not been hindered in the workplace because of their race or sex, are required to offer other particularized evidence, apart from their race and sex, that suggests some reason why an employer might discriminate against them.”
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.