Case Citator › Holifield v. Reno

Holifield v. Reno

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

Abrogated
Court
Eleventh Circuit
Citation
115 F.3d 1555
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
66 of 66
Citing cases (total)
66
Treatment dates
2019
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. Holifield v. Reno has been abrogated on its comparator standard. All 66 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The en banc Eleventh Circuit replaced Holifield's “same or similar” wording with a requirement that comparators be similarly situated in all material respects. That treatment is listed below; the opinion's other Title VII rulings were not displaced by this decision.

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.

66 later cases cite Holifield v. Reno; 66 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 Holifield v. Reno?

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

Abrogated

  • The en banc Eleventh Circuit replaced Holifield's “same or similar” comparator standard with a requirement that comparators be similarly situated in all material respects.

    Jacqueline Lewis v. City of Union City, Georgia · Eleventh Circuit (en banc) · filed

    In still others, without even mentioning the nearly-identical benchmark, we have deemed it sufficient that the plaintiff and the comparator engaged in the “same or similar” conduct. See, e.g., Holifield v. Reno, 115 F.3d 1555, 1562 (11th Cir. 1997) (per curiam). ... With respect to the standard itself, we hold that the proper test for evaluating comparator evidence is neither plain-old “same or similar” nor “nearly identical,” as our past cases have discordantly suggested. ... must demonstrate that she and her proffered comparators were “similarly situated in all material respects.”
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Holifield v. Reno 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