Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 143 F.3d 246 - Hadix v. Johnson

Hadix v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

143 F.3d 246 · 1998

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
February 2015
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2015 · most notably Bill Martin Director Michigan Department of Correctionss v. Everett Hadix (1999), Craig v. Eberly (1998)

14 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

190199820002010decided

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 Hensley v. Eckerhart · Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Lindh v. Murphy · Field v. Mans · Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman

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

  1. “(1) In any action brought by a prisoner who is confined to any jail, prison, or other correctional facility, in which attorney's fees are authorized under [ 42 U.S.C. § 1988 ], such fees shall not be awarded, except to the extent that — (A) the fee was directly and reasonably incurred in proving an actual violation of the plaintiff's rights protected by a statute pursuant to which a fee may be awarded under [ 42 U.S.C. § 1988 ]; and (B)(i) the amount of the fee is proportionately related to the court ordered relief for the violation; or (ii) the fee was directly and reasonably incurred in enforcing the relief ordered for the violation. (2) Whenever a monetary judgment is awarded in an action described in paragraph (1), a portion of the judgment (not to exceed 25 percent) shall be applied to satisfy the amount of attorney's fees awarded against the defendant. If the award of attorney's fees is not greater than 150 percent of the judgment, the excess shall be paid by the defendant. (3) No award of attorney's fees in an action described in paragraph (1) shall be based on an hourly rate greater than 150 percent of the hourly rate established under section 3006A of Title 18, [the Criminal Justice Act,] for payment of court-appointed counsel....”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “any action brought by a prisoner who is confined to any jail, prison, or other correctional facility.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[This section] shall apply with respect to all prospective relief whether such relief was originally granted or approved before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this title.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.