← 943 F.2d 1230 - Ortega v. Safeway Stores, Inc.

Ortega v. Safeway Stores, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

943 F.2d 1230 · 1991

Citation profile

cited by 79 later decisions

states following

July 2015

most recently cited

37 federal appellate · 31 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently July 2015 · most notably Thomas v. International Business Machines (1995), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Flasher Co. (1992)

37 federal appellate · 31 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 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 · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States

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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“specific identifiable employment practice or policy caused a significant disparate impact on a protected group.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Jefferson v. City Oklahoma City Fire Department · 628 F. Supp. 2d 1275 - Jackson v. City and County of Denver
“[A]ny statistical analysis must involve the appropriate comparables and must cross a threshold of reliability before it can establish even a prima facie case of disparate impact.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 628 F. Supp. 2d 1275 - Jackson v. City and County of Denver · Bullington v. United Air Lines, Inc.
“persuade the factfinder that 'other tests or selection devices, without a similarly undesirable [discriminatory] effect, would also serve the employer's legitimate [hiring] interest[s].' " Further, those alternative practices "must be equally effective ... in achieving [the employer's] legitimate employment goals.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Murphy v. Derwinski · Pippin v. Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Co.

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.