Biddle v. Chatel’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 2010
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 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
Relies on Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper · Helvering v. Gowran · Prentice v. North American Title Guaranty Corp. · Hill v. Okay Const. Co., Inc.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The exception has specific requirements: Where a plaintiff seeks in a separate action to recover attomey[’s] fees incurred by him in earlier litigation with a third person arising out of the tortious act of the defendant, ... if the natural and proximate consequences of the defendant’s tortious act were to involve the plaintiff in litigation with a third person, reasonable compensation for attorney’s fees may be recovered as damages against the author of the tortious act.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Perry v. Scholar · Dalo v. Kivitz“(1) [t]he plaintiff must have incurred attorney’s fees in the prosecution or defense of a prior action; (2) the litigation ordinarily must have been with a third party and not with the defendant in the present action; and (3) the plaintiff must have become involved in such litigation because of some tortious act of the defendant.”
2 later decisions 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.