Rothmeier v. Investment Advisers, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
85 F.3d 1328 · 1996
Citation profile
149 federal appellate · 25 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 261 later decisions — most recently April 2018 · most notably Aka v. Washington Hospital Center (1998), Ryther v. KARE 11 (1997)
149 federal appellate · 25 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
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens · Salve Regina College v. Russell
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 261 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“only if the evidence considered in its entirety (1) creates a fact issue as to whether the employer's proffered reasons are pretextual and (2) creates a reasonable inference that age was a determinative factor in the adverse employment decision.”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a plaintiff] has the initial burden to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. If [the plaintiff] establishes a prima facie case, the burden shifts to [the defendant] to articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for [the allegedly unconstitutional] action. If [the defendant] articulates such a reason, the burden returns to [the plaintiff] to prove that the proffered reason is pretextual.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]ntentional discrimination vel non is like any other ultimate question of fact: either the evidence is sufficient to support a finding that the fact has been proven, or it is not.”
7 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.