201 Md. App. 79 - Friolo v. Frankel’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
8 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975) · 20 U.S.C. § 1415 · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Blum v. Stenson · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air · City of Riverside v. Rivera
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If a plaintiff demands $100,000.00 while the defendant offers to settle for $50,000.00, only to have the jury award the settlement of $50,000.00, the value of that litigation is the same as if the plaintiff had demanded $50,000.00, only to be offered and awarded $0.00. In either case, the value of the litigation is zero because the proper ‘baseline’ to measure success is the defendant’s willingness to pay, which is the approach taken by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Friolo v. Frankel
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.