Austin v. Ford Models, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
149 F.3d 148 · 1998
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2016 · most notably Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A. (2002), Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc. (2000)
13 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Cortec Industries, Inc. v. Sum Holding L.P. · Shields v. Citytrust Bancorp, Inc.
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]n amended complaint ordinarily supersedes the original, and renders it of no legal effect....” Austin v. Ford Models, Inc., 149 F.3d 148, 155 (2d Cir.1998) (quoting Shields v. Citytrust Bancorp, Inc., 25 F.3d 1124, 1128 (2d Cir.1994)); see Duda v. Board of Educ. of Franklin Park Public School District No. 84, 133 F.3d 1054, 1057 (7th Cir.1998) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination.”
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.