Combs v. Plantation Patterns’s Empirical Analysis
106 F.3d 1519 · 1997
Citation profile
138 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 753 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably Chapman v. AI Transport (2000), Aka v. Washington Hospital Center (1998)
138 federal appellate · 2 district · 12 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 621 (§ 2 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 753 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[t]he plaintiff retains the burden of persuasion [of showing intentional discrimination]. [H]e may succeed in this either directly by persuading the [factfinder] that a discriminatory reason more likely motivated the employer or indirectly by showing that the employer's proffered explanation is unworthy of credence.”
21 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“federal courts do not sit to second-guess the business judgment of employers”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[t]he district court must evaluate whether the plaintiff has demonstrated such weaknesses, implausibilities, incoherencies, or contradictions in the employer's proffered legitimate reasons for its action that a reasonable factfinder could find them unworthy of credence.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.