Fox v. Vice’s Empirical Analysis
563 U.S. 826 · 2011
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 17 district · 22 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Kentucky v. Graham · Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · Koon v. United States · Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
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 173 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“trial courts need not, and indeed should not, become green-eyeshade accountants”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A court should compensate the plaintiff for the time his attorney reasonably spent in achieving the favorable outcome, even if “the plaintiff failed to prevail on every contention.” The fee award, of course, should not reimburse the plaintiff for work performed on claims that bore no relation to the grant of relief: Such work “cannot be deemed to have been expended in pursuit of the ultimate result achieved.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Restivo v. Hessemann“if the [prevailing] defendant would have incurred those fees anyway, to defend against non-frivolous claims, then a court has no basis for transferring the expense to the plaintiff.”
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.