McGinnis v. Kentucky Fried Chicken of California’s Empirical Analysis
42 F.3d 1273 · 1994
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1981A
Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Farrar v. Hobby · Kerr v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California · Ed. Kerr v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc., a Corporation, Richard A. Perkins, Counsel for Ed Kerr v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc., a Corporation, H. O'Neil Shanks, and Norman Stevans, Richard A. Perkins, Counsel For
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Punitive damages are authorized by that statute today.”
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.