INGRAHAM ET AL.

v.

WRIGHT ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324 (U.S. 1977)
  …District Court to hold the evidentiary hearings necessary to apply these remedial principles. We granted both the company's and the union's petitions for certiorari to consider the significant questions presented under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 425 U. S. 990. II In this Court the company and the union contend that their conduct did not violate Title VII in any respect, asserting first that the evidence introduced at trial was insufficient to show that the company engaged in a “pattern or practice” of…
• Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (U.S. 1977)
  …vior or whether in a particular instance of misconduct five licks would have been a more appropriate punishment than ten licks. . . .” Ibid. We granted certiorari, limited to the questions of cruel and unusual punishment and procedural due process. 425 U. S. 990.12 II In addressing the scope of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, this Court has found it useful to refer to “[traditional common-law concepts,” Powell v. Texas, 392 U. S. 514, 535 (1968) (plurality opinion), and…
• E. Tex. Motor Freight Sys., Inc. v. Rodriguez, 431 U.S. 395 (U.S. 1977)
  …class under 42 U. S. C. § 1981 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 78 Stat. 253, as amended, 42 U. S. C. § 2000e et seg. (1970 ed. and Supp. V). 505 F. 2d 40. This Court granted certiorari to review the judgment of the Court of Appeals. 425 U. S. 990. I The respondents are three Mexican-Americans who initiated this litigation as the named plaintiffs, Jesse Rodriguez, Sadrach Perez, and Modesto Herrera. They were employed as city drivers at the company’s San Antonio terminal, and were members o…