Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 227 FSUPP2D 881 - Geier v. Sundquist

Geier v. Sundquist’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
June 2004
most recently cited

3 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 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 · In Re: Cendant Corporation Litigation

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

  1. “Counsel urges the Court to consider the Johnson factors ... either as bearing upon the lodestar amount or an enhancement thereof.... [The district court here lists the Johnson factors].... The one factor in Johnson that the Supreme Court felt may be still available is that of “risk.” When the case was filed in 1968, there was substantial risk that the outcome might be unfavorable. Although Broum, v. Board had been decided 14 years before, this case involved higher education and the law was unsettled. Risk ■ was removed after Judge Gray’s early decisions, and certainly was finally removed after the Stipulation of Settlement in 1984. Thereafter, the case only required monitoring for compliance. A flurry of activity in the case arose when the state sought dismissal under the decision in Fordice. When Attorney General Paul Summers took office and indicated a desire to settle the case, and initiated mediation, good will and innovative efforts on the part of all counsel and parties resulted in the Consent Decree. Therefore, under the teaching of [Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens’ Council for Clear Air, 478 U.S. 546 , 106 S.Ct. 3088 , 92 L.Ed.2d 439 (1986)] no enhancement is warranted and the Court fixes the lodestar at $250 per hour.”
    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.