Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 128 Idaho 123 - Haley v. Clinton

Haley v. Clinton’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
March 2001
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Acequia Inc. v. Clinton · Matter of Estate of Bagley · Stoor's Inc. v. Idaho Department of Parks & Recreation · Jordan v. Hunter · Viebrock v. Gill

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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[o]ne of the main issues at trial was the amount of fees incurred and the amount that had been previously paid. In order to calculate the amount, the district court was required to make credibility determinations, examine conflicting documentary evidence and choose between competing arguments regarding differing sums. Thus, the amount of the award, if any, was not liquidated, nor was it capable of ascertainment by mere mathematical process.”
    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.