Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 574 F.3d 406 - Wolf v. Kennelly

Wolf v. Kennelly’s Empirical Analysis

574 F.3d 406 · 2009

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
February 2019
most recently cited

3 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447

Relies on Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp. · Brosseau v. Haugen · Martin v. Franklin Capital Corp. · City of Indianapolis v. Chase Nat Bank of City of New York · Krueger v. Cartwright

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

  1. “if, at the time the defendant filed his notice [of removal] in federal court, clearly established law demonstrated that he had no basis for removal, then a district court should award a plaintiff his attorneys' fees. By contrast, if clearly established law did not foreclose a defendant's basis for removal , then a district court should not award attorneys' fees.”
    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.