Citation network
Dothard Vs. Rawlinson
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 27, 1977
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 321 (1977) U.S. Supreme Court Dothard v. RawlinsonSearch
-
U.S. 321 (1977) Dothard v. RawlinsonSearch
-
of federal law. A three-judge Federal District Court for the Middle District of Alabama decided in her favor. Mieth v. DothardSearch
-
Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
to exclude women from eligibility for employment by the Alabama Board of Corrections. We dealt in Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
Power Co., supra, and Albemarle Paper Co. v. MoodySearch
-
supra at 422 U. S. 425 , quoting McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSearch
-
of disproportionate impact must always be based on analysis of the characteristics of actual applicants. See Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
because of a self-recognized inability to meet the very standards challenged as being discriminatory. See Teamsters v. UnitedSearch
-
to the general rule requiring equality of employment opportunities. This view has been variously formulated. In Diaz v. PanSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Emphasis in original.) In an earlier case, Weeks v. SouthernSearch
-
Phillips v. MartinSearch
-
are constitutionally intolerable. Pugh v. LockeSearch
-
Cf. Frontiero v. RichardsonSearch
-
me to require us to hold that the District Court erred as a matter of law in admitting them into evidence. See Hamling v. UnitedSearch
-
Zenith Corp. v. HazeltineSearch
-
job qualification requirement has a disparate impact on some group protected by Title VII. Hazelwood School Dist. v. UnitedSearch
-
Hamling v. UnitedSearch
-
Mayor v. EducationalSearch
-
McAllister v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. YellowSearch
-
such statistics are to be considered in light of all other relevant facts and circumstances. Cf. Teamsters v. UnitedSearch
-
suffer from the obvious lack of relevancy of the statistics relied on by the District Court in Hazelwood School Dist. v. UnitedSearch
-
to demonstrate that other tests, without such disparate effect, would also meet that concern. Albemarle Paper Co. v. MoodySearch
-
statute, had the burden placed on them to advance job-related reasons for the qualification. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSearch
-
the defendant to articulate the asserted job-related reasons underlying the use of the minima. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSearch
-
on arguments in favor of a job qualification that were not first presented to the trial court. Cf. United States v. ArnoldSearch
-
Thomas v. TaylorSearch
-
f), (h) (1970 ed., Supp. V). Not having been raised in the District Court, that issue is not before us. See Adickes v. KressSearch
-
See Engineers v. ChicagoSearch
-
See Teamsters v. UnitedSearch
-
S.Rep. No. 92-415, p. 10 (1971). See also Schaeffer v. SanSearch
-
Washington v. DavisSearch
-
Justice v. CivilSearch
-
Gillin v. FederalSearch
-
Jurinko v. EdwinSearch
-
Rosenfeld v. SouthernSearch
-
Bowe v. Colgate-PalmoliveSearch
-
Meadows v. FordSearch
-
Co., 62 F.R.D. 98 (WD Ky.), modified on other grounds, 510 F.2d 939 (CA6). See also Jones Metal Products Co. v. WalkerSearch
-
to that principle consistently, and its construction of the statute can accordingly be given weight. See Griggs v. DukeSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Dothard v. RawlinsonSearch
-
Mieth v. DothardSearch
-
and Albemarle Paper Co. v. MoodySearch
-
See Griggs v. DukeSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial