Gray’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 52 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 193 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Barbara Sheridan v. Ei Dupont De Nemours and Company Jacques Amblard (1996), Armbruster v. Unisys Corp. (1994)
22 federal appellate · 52 district · 4 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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · United Families of America v. Kendrick · Andrijevic v. Kelleran · Delaware v. New York
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 193 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'the law does not permit an employee's subjective perceptions to govern a claim of constructive discharge,”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ Gray cannot establish a prima case of age discrimination because she was not discharged from her employment with York but rather voluntarily elected early retirement. Gray maintains that, resolving all factual inferences in her favor, there was ample evidence from which a jury could conclude that a reasonable person in her position would resign under the circumstances. We employ an objective test in determining whether an employee was constructively discharged from employment: whether “the conduct complained of would have the foreseeable result that working conditions would be so unpleasant or difficult that a reasonable person in the employee’s shoes would resign.” (citations omitted), (emphasis added). ****** Gray contends that her decision to retire was her only practical choice since she: (1) had witnessed Harris Sacks forced out of his job by the new management; (2) knew that Linda Roeder had been harassed by the new management to the point where she had to take medical leave; (3) felt isolated by being offered a “secret retirement” option; (4) had been told that she was going to be removed from her longtime courthouse beat after she had told her new boss how much she enjoyed that work; and (5) felt that Graham lied to her regarding the reasons he permitted her to continue in the courthouse beat after being told that she would be reassigned. ****** While all inferences are to be drawn in Gray’s favor, we find that no reasonable trier of fact could conclude that G”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]n the absence of direct evidence, a plaintiff may establish a prima facie case by demonstrating by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she (1) belongs to a protected class, ie. is at least 40 years of age; (2) was qualified for the position; (3) was dismissed despite being qualified; and (4) ultimately was replaced by a person sufficiently younger to permit an inference of age discrimination.”
4 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.