Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that class action plaintiffs may “carr[y] their burden [by] demonstrating the existence of a discriminatory hiring pattern and practice”
• holding that the interests of “unnamed members of the class” who are entitled to relief may satisfy the case-or-controversy requirement
• holding that the interests of “unnamed members of the class” who are entitled to relief may satisfy the case-or-controversy requirement
• recognizing that a central purpose of Title VII is to make victims of employment discrimination whole and that Congress “effectuate[d] this ‘make whole’ objective” in part by authorizing the remedy of reinstatement
• emphasizing that the Court’s holding in Sosna did not depend on the existence of a claim “capable of repetition, yet evading review”
• stating that “claims under Title VII involve the vindication of a major public interest” (internal quotations omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co.

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co.
  Supreme Court· 1975-03-24
• Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co.
  Supreme Court· 1975-10-06