Smith v. Comair, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 federal appellate · 14 district · 15 state decisions

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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The ADA’s preemption clause ..., read together with the [Federal Aviation Act’s] saving clause, stops States from imposing their own substantive standards with respect to rates, routes, or services, but not from affording relief to a party who claims and proves that an airline dishonored a term the airline itself stipulated. This distinction between what the State dictates and what the airline itself undertakes confines courts, in breach-of-contract actions, to the parties’ bargain, with no enlargement or enhancement based on state laws or policies external to the agreement.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Leonard v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. · 370 F. Supp. 2d 552 - In Re American Airlines, Inc., Privacy Litigation

2. ““(a) Mandatory refusal.-—The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall prescribe regulations requiring an air carrier, intrastate air carrier, or foreign air carrier to refuse to transport— “(1) a passenger who does not consent to a search under section 44901(a) of this title establishing whether the passenger is carrying unlawfully a dangerous weapon, explosive, or other destructive substance; or “(2) property of a passenger who does not consent to a search of the property establishing whether the property unlawfully contains a dangerous weapon, explosive, or other destructive substance. “(b) Permissive refusal.—Subject to regulations of the Administrator, an air carrier, intrastate air carrier, or foreign air carrier may refuse to transport a passenger or property the carrier decides is, or might be, inimical to safety. “(c) Agreeing to consent to search.-—An agreement to carry passengers or property in air transportation or intrastate air transportation by an air carrier, intrastate air carrier, or foreign air carrier is deemed to include an agreement that the passenger or property will not be carried if consent to search the passenger or property for a purpose referred to in this section is not given.” (Italics added.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Wainwright's Vacations, LLC v. Pan American Airways Corp. · 96 Cal. App. 4th 364 - Rubin v. United Air Lines, Inc.

3. “Suits stemming from outrageous conduct on the part of an airline toward a passenger will not be preempted under the ADA if the conduct too tenuously relates or is unnecessary to an airline’s services. If, for example, an airline held a passenger without a safety or security justification, a claim based on such actions would not relate to any legitimate service and would not be preempted. [39]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 855 F. Supp. 2d 433 - Danner v. International Freight Systems of Washington, LLC · 570 F. Supp. 2d 925 - Al-Tawan v. American Airlines, Inc.