Case Citator › Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa

Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
539 U.S. 90
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
346 of 346
Citing cases (total)
1,574
Treatment dates
2004
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa is limited: all 346 flagged citations have been read, with the one confirmed treatment listed below. Griffith v. City of Des Moines declined to extend Desert Palace's mixed-motive jury-instruction holding to alter the Eighth Circuit's summary-judgment framework.
More on how this was screened

The other reviewed opinions applied Desert Palace positively; reported its displacement of older direct-evidence rules; applied or reported Griffith's limitation; distinguished the different statutory texts governing ADEA, Title VII retaliation, and § 1981 claims; rejected party arguments; or placed unrelated adverse vocabulary near the citation. Duplicate copies of the same opinion do not create duplicate entries.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

1,574 later cases cite Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa; 346 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • The Eighth Circuit declined to extend Desert Palace's mixed-motive jury-instruction holding to modify the circuit's existing summary-judgment framework.

    Griffith v. City of Des Moines · Eighth Circuit · filed

    Griffith urges us to conclude ... that the Supreme Court in Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa ... implicitly directed us to modify our Circuit’s use of the familiar framework established in McDonnell Douglas ... at the summary judgment stage ... We do not agree that Desert Palace affected controlling Eighth Circuit precedents in this fashion. ... Thus, we conclude that Desert Palace had no impact on prior Eighth Circuit summary judgment decisions.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace