Supreme Court· 3/24/1976

Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co.

Citations

424 U.S. 747
96 S. Ct. 1251
47 L. Ed. 2d 444
1976 U.S. LEXIS 140
21 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 469
11 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 10,777
12 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 549

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).

Judges: Brennan, Stewart, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Powell, Burger, Rehnquist, Stevens

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

1,150 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co.

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.