Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 51 F.3d 1179 - Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Inc. v. Windall

Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Inc. v. Windall’s Empirical Analysis

51 F.3d 1179 · 1995

Citation profile

118
cited by 118 later decisions
1
states following
September 2022
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 17 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 118 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably Schwarz v. Secretary of Health & Human Services (1995), Washington v. Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas (1996)

29 federal appellate · 17 district · 1 state decisions

5301995200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 33 U.S.C. § 1311 · 33 U.S.C. § 1319 · 33 U.S.C. § 1365 · 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 · Baskett v. United States

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

  1. “In calculating the hours reasonably expended, a court should 'review the time charged, decide whether the hours set out were reasonably expended for each of the particular purposes described and then exclude those that are”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Hours that would not generally be billed to one's own client are not properly billed to an adversary.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The standards employed calculating attorneys' fees awards are legal questions subject to plenary review, but `[t]he amount of a fee award ... is within the district court's discretion so long as it employs correct standards and procedures and makes findings of fact not clearly erroneous.'”
    3 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.