Maxwell v. Aer Lingus Ltd.’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 2022
1 district ·
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
Relies on Air France v. Saks · El Al Israel Airlines, Ltd. v. Tsui Yuan Tseng · Langadinos v. American Airlines, Inc. · Potter v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · Abramson v. Japan Airlines Co.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While a reasonable passenger would expect some shifting of the contents of an overhead bin, . . . she would not expect . . . to be struck on the head by a falling object when the bin above her seat is opened by a fellow passenger.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“where there is contradictory evidence, it is for the trier of fact to decide whether an 'accident' as here defined caused the passenger's injury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.