Carter v. Casa Central’s Empirical Analysis
849 F.2d 1048 · 1988
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently June 2014 · most notably Byrne v. Board of Education (1992), Cook v. State of Rhode Island Department of Mental Health Retardation and Hospitals (1993)
15 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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. § 706 · 29 U.S.C. § 794
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens · Southeastern Community College v. Davis
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he Rehabilitation Act requires only a stereotype-free assessment of the person's abilities and prospects rather than a correct decision.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a]n employer's concerns about the abilities of a handicapped employee ... must be based on more than 'reflective' reactions about a handicapped individual's ability to do the job, no matter how well-intentioned”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[d]iscrimination on the basis of handicap usually ... occurs under the guise of extending a helping hand or a mistaken, restrictive belief as to the limitations of handicapped persons”
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.