847 F. Supp. 2d 28 - Bolden v. Clinton’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
7 district ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“statistics that 'indicate nothing more than an under-representation [of a protected class]' cannot alone create a triable issue of fact.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“establish the statistical significance of his [pattern-or-practice] evidence”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Markowicz v. Nielsen
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.