The Last Minuet: Disparate Treatment After <em>Hicks</em>

Malamud, Deborah C.

Journal: Michigan Law Review

Volume: 93

First Page: 2229

Year: 1995

Bluebook Citation: 93 MICH. L. REV. 2229 (1995)

Author: Deborah C. Malamud: all 11 publications


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

Cited
7
Citing decisions
6+
Courts citing

Citations by decade

5
1
1
1990s2000s2020s

Courts citing this journal article

1st Cir.1
3rd Cir.1
5th Cir.1
6th Cir.1
D. Del.1
D.C. Cir.1
Most recently cited by7

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

The purpose of this article is to explain why the Court's much-maligned decision in Hicks was correct, and to further argue that in the aftermath of Hicks, the McDonnell Douglas-Burdine proof structure ought to be abandoned.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.