Ingels v. Thiokol Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
42 F.3d 616 · 1994
Citation profile
85 federal appellate · 102 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 232 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Simms v. Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services (1999), Morgan v. Hilti, Inc. (1997)
85 federal appellate · 102 district · 7 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.
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 623 (§ 4 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Applied Genetics International, Inc. v. First Affiliated Securities, Inc. · 103 S. Ct. 247 - Beneficial Finance of Kansas, Inc. v. United States
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 232 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We review the grant or denial of summary judgment de novo, applying the same legal standard used by the district court under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c).”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and ... the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“At that stage, if a plaintiff advances evidence establishing a prima facie case and evidence upon which a factfinder could conclude that the defendant’s alleged nondiscriminatory reasons for the employment decisions are pretextual, the case should go to the factfinder.”
6 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.