Johnson v. Ford Motor Co.’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Carlson v. General Motors Corp. · Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. v. Armstrong
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“none of [Plaintiffs' proposed] experts can say that, for those Plaintiffs who alleged they experienced [a UIA], their events were the result of the alleged defect with the ETC system. Quite simply, Plaintiffs produced no experts who can testify that [their] alleged [UIAs] were proximately caused by the alleged defect rather than some other known cause for such events.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“this gap between Plaintiffs' experts' opinions and what allegedly occurred in Plaintiffs' specific vehicles fatal to Plaintiffs' warranty and unjust enrichment claims.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a causal link between their alleged [UIAs] and the alleged defect.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.