Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 535 U.S. 789 - Gisbrecht v. Barnhart

Gisbrecht v. Barnhart’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

860
cited by 860 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

130 federal appellate · 124 district · 34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 860 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably Perdue v. Kenny A. Ex Rel. Winn (2010), Arbor Hill Concerned Citizens Neighborhood Ass'n v. County of Albany & Albany County Board of Elections (2007)

130 federal appellate · 124 district · 34 state decisions

4470200220102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedEd. Kerr v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc., a Corporation, Richard A. Perkins, Counsel for Ed Kerr v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc., a Corporation, H. O'Neil Shanks, and Norman Stevans, Richard A. Perkins, Counsel For (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 22 U.S.C. § 1623 · 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 28 U.S.C. § 2678 · 31 U.S.C. § 3554 · 33 U.S.C. § 1365 · 38 U.S.C. § 1984 · 38 U.S.C. § 5904 · 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 · Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute

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

  1. “to refun[d] to the claimant the amount of the smaller fee.”
    54 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “commence ... with the contingent fee agreement, but then to adjust the figure that agreement produces on the basis of factors (most notably, the actual time spent multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate, ante , at 1828 ) that are, in a sense, the precise antithesis of the contingent-fee agreement....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “I do not know what the judges of our district courts and courts of appeals are to make of today's opinion. I have no idea what the trial judge is to do if he finds the fee produced by the (”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.