Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 229 F.3d 1249 - Robert Powers v. Paul Eichen

Robert Powers v. Paul Eichen’s Empirical Analysis

229 F.3d 1249 · 2000

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
4
states following
September 2017
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · Marino v. Ortiz · Chalmers v. City of Los Angeles · Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Bolger · Paul, Johnson, Alston & Hunt v. Graulty

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

  1. “the choice of whether to base an attorneys' fee award on either net or gross recovery should not make a difference so long as the end result is reasonable. Our case law teaches that the reasonableness of attorneys' fees is not measured by the choice of the denominator.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Total attorneys’ fees and expenses awarded by the court to counsel for the plaintiff class shall not exceed a reasonable percentage of the amount of any damages and prejudgment interest actually paid to the class.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Although the new provision requires reasonable fees and expenses, it does not mandate a particular approach to determining fees. The legislation’s primary purpose was to prevent fee awards under the lodestar method from taking up too great a percentage of the total recovery. The new provision, however, does not eliminate the use of the lodestar approach, nor does it require that fees be based on a percentage of net recovery. It simply requires that the fees and expenses ultimately awarded be reasonable in relation to what the plaintiffs recovered.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.