Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 375 F.3d 552 - Hudson v. Chicago Transit Authority

Hudson v. Chicago Transit Authority’s Empirical Analysis

375 F.3d 552 · 2004

Citation profile

104
cited by 104 later decisions
1
states following
April 2022
most recently cited

42 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 104 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably Argyropoulos v. City of Alton (2008), Washington v. Illinois Department of Revenue (2005)

42 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

700200420102020decided

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 McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Shager v. Upjohn Co. · Dale v. Chicago Tribune 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 104 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “directly comparable in all material respects.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Even where the plaintiff establishes all of the required elements to make out a prima facie case, if the employer presents unrebutted evidence of a non-invidious reason for the employment action at issue, the employer is entitled to summary judgment unless there is a material issue of fact as to whether the employer’s non-invidious reason is pretext for retaliation.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “is to present direct evidence (evidence that establishes without resort to inferences from circumstantial evidence) that he engaged in protected activity (filing a charge of discrimination) and as a result suffered the adverse employment action of which he complains.”
    2 later decisions 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.