Estien v. Christian’s Empirical Analysis
507 F.2d 61 · 1975
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 12 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Lindy Bros. Builders, Inc. v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp. (1976), Ursic v. Bethlehem Mines (1983)
15 federal appellate · 12 district ·
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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · Lindy Bros. Builders, Inc. of Phila. v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp. · Merola v. Atlantic Richfield Co. · Lucerne Investment Co. v. Estate Belvedere, 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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““§ 541. Costs defined— “(a) Costs which may be allowed in a civil action include: “(6) Attorney’s fees as provided in subsection (b) of this section. “(b) The measure and mode of compensation of attorneys shall be left to the agreement, express or implied, of the parties; but there shall be allowed to the prevailing party in the judgment such sums as the court in its discretion may fix by way of indemnity for his attorneys fees in maintaining the action or defense thereto.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ratner v. Young“[t]his record does not disclose whether or not defendant ... had arranged to compensate his attorney on a contingent basis.”
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.