Case Citator › Tarshis v. Riese Organization

Tarshis v. Riese Organization

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

Abrogated
Court
Second Circuit
Citation
211 F.3d 30
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
39 of 39
Citing cases (total)
39
Treatment dates
2002
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. Abrogated: the Supreme Court rejected the employment discrimination pleading requirement applied in Tarshis v. Riese Organization. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A. held that a complaint need not plead a McDonnell Douglas prima facie case.
More on how this was screened

Later courts continued to apply Tarshis's separate rulings on adverse employment action and circumstances supporting an inference of discrimination. All 39 flagged citations have been read; the confirmed treatment is listed below.

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.

39 later cases cite Tarshis v. Riese Organization; 39 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 Tarshis v. Riese Organization?

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 rejected Tarshis's use of the McDonnell Douglas prima facie case as a pleading requirement in employment discrimination suits.

    Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A. · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal, relying on its settled precedent, which requires a plaintiff in an employment discrimination complaint to allege facts constituting a prima facie case of discrimination under the framework set forth by this Court in McDonnell Douglas, supra, at 802. See, e. g., Tarshis v. Riese Organization, 211 F. 3d 30, 35-36, 38 (CA2 2000); ... The prima facie case under McDonnell Douglas, however, is an evidentiary standard, not a pleading requirement.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Tarshis v. Riese Organization 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