Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
488 F.2d 714 · 1974
Citation profile
1,170 federal appellate · 296 district · 286 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3,872 later decisions (13 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Hensley v. Eckerhart (1983), Blum v. Stenson (1984)
1,170 federal appellate · 296 district · 286 state decisions — followed in 40 states
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 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. · Robinson v. Lorillard Corp. · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc.
Cited together with Hensley v. Eckerhart · Blum v. Stenson · Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air · Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, 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 3,872 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the time and labor expended; (2) the novelty and difficulty of the questions raised; (3) the skill required to properly perform the legal services rendered; (4) the attorney’s opportunity costs in pressing the instant litigation; (5) the customary fee for like work; (6) the attorney’s expectations at the outset of the litigation; (7) the time limitations imposed by the client or circumstances; (8) the amount in controversy and the results obtained; (9) the experience, reputation and ability of the attorney; (10) the undesirability of the case within the legal community in which the suit arose; (11) the nature and length of the professional relationship between attorney and client; and (12) attorneys’ fees awards in similar cases.”
620 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"To put these guidelines into perspective and as a caveat to their application, courts must remember that they do not have a mandate under Section 706(k) to make the prevailing counsel rich. Concomitantly, the Section should not be implemented in a manner to make the private attorney general's position so lucrative as to ridicule the public attorney general. The statute was not passed for the benefit of attorneys but to enable litigants to obtain competent counsel worthy of a contest with the caliber of counsel available to their opposition and to fairly place the economical burden of Title VII litigation. Adequate compensation is necessary, however, to enable an attorney to serve his client effectively and to preserve the integrity and independence of the profession. The guidelines contained herein are merely an attempt to assist in this balancing process."”
26 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the costs.”
18 later decisions 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.