Case Citator › Taylor v. Virginia Union University

Taylor v. Virginia Union University

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

Abrogated
Court
Fourth Circuit
Citation
193 F.3d 219
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
36 of 36
Citing cases (total)
36
Treatment dates
2003
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. Taylor v. Virginia Union University has been abrogated in part; the confirmed treatment is listed below. All 36 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The Supreme Court held that direct evidence is unnecessary for a mixed-motive instruction under Title VII, displacing Taylor's direct-evidence requirement. The Fourth Circuit recognized that effect in Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co. Taylor's separate rulings on harmless error and other issues are not addressed by that holding.

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.

36 later cases cite Taylor v. Virginia Union University; 36 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 Taylor v. Virginia Union University?

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 Supreme Court displaced Taylor's requirement of direct evidence to obtain a mixed-motive instruction under Title VII.

    Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    The question before us in this case is whether a plaintiff must present direct evidence of discrimination in order to obtain a mixed-motive instruction under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (1991 Act). We hold that direct evidence is not required.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Taylor v. Virginia Union University 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