Baumgardner v. ROA General, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 206 (Equal Pay Act of 1963) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Carnegie v. United States · Brame v. United States · County of Washington v. Gunther · Meeks v. Computer Associates International · Miranda v. B & B Cash Grocery Store, Inc.
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“not required to meet the exacting standard of substantial equality of positions set forth in the Equal Pay Act and may establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination under Title VII by demonstrating that she is female and that the job she occupied was similar to higher paying jobs occupied by males.”
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.