Case Citator › Crawford v. Carroll

Crawford v. Carroll

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

Good law
Court
Eleventh Circuit
Citation
529 F.3d 961
Decided
Confirmed treatments
0
Flagged citations read
102 of 102
Citing cases (total)
698
Good law
Every flagged citation to this case has been read, and none of them overrules, limits, or questions it. All 102 flagged citations for Crawford v. Carroll have been read; no adverse treatment was confirmed, so this record finds that the case remains good law. The reviewed opinions followed or applied Crawford's Title VII retaliation and adverse-action rules.
More on how this was screened

Nearby “abrogated” and “overruled” language principally reported Crawford's own recognition that Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White displaced older Eleventh Circuit retaliation standards, or concerned unrelated authorities and history parentheticals. Noris Babb v. Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs expressly followed Crawford, and two vacated Corbitt v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. panel opinions supplied no treatment. Three citing opinions each generated two flagged citations; all were read, and each opinion was considered once.

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.

698 later cases cite Crawford v. Carroll; 102 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 Crawford v. Carroll?

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.

No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.

Every one of the 102 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Crawford v. Carroll 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