Gierlinger v. Gleason’s Empirical Analysis
160 F.3d 858 · 1998
Citation profile
43 federal appellate · 11 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 202 later decisions — most recently June 2023 · most notably O'Rourke v. City of Providence (2001), Back v. Hastings on Hudson Union Free School District (2004)
43 federal appellate · 11 district · 5 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. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956) · 29 U.S.C. § 206 (Equal Pay Act of 1963) · 29 U.S.C. § 701 (Employment Opportunities for Individuals With Disabilities Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Will v. Michigan Department of State Police · Blum v. Stenson · Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins
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 202 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The district court must thus examine the hours expended by counsel and the value of the work product of the particular expenditures to the client’s case. Efforts put into research, briefing and the preparation of a case can expand to fill the time available, and some judgment must be made in the awarding of fees as to diminishing returns from such further efforts.... In making this examination, the district court does not play the role of an uninformed arbiter but may look to its own familiarity with the case and its experience generally as well as to the evidentiary submissions and arguments of the parties. DiFilippo v. Morizio, 759 F.2d 231, 235-36 (2d Cir.1985); see, e.g. Luciano v. Olsten Corp., 109 F.3d 111, 116 (2d Cir.1997); Clarke v. Frank, 960 F.2d 1146, 1153 (2d Cir.1992). If the court determines that certain claimed hours are “excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary,” Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. at 434 , 103 S.Ct. 1933 , 76 L.Ed.2d 40 , the court should exclude those hours in its calculation of the lodestar.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“as in all S 1983 cases, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant's action was a proximate cause of the plaintiff 's injury”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“(i) the need to fully compensate the wronged party for actual damages suffered, (ii) considerations of fairness and the relative equities of the award, (in) the remedial purpose of the statute involved, and/or (iv) such other general principles as are deemed relevant by the court.”
3 later decisions 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.