Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 587 F.2d 362 - Davis v. Murphy

Davis v. Murphy’s Empirical Analysis

587 F.2d 362 · 1978

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
October 2008
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2008 · most notably Hanrahan v. Hampton (1980), Hampton v. Hanrahan (1979)

21 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

3201978198019902000decided

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)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988

Relies on United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Hutto v. Finney · Bond v. Stanton · Davis v. Murphy

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

  1. “a prevailing plaintiff should receive fees almost as a matter of course.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is intended that the standards for awarding fees be generally the same as under the fee provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. A party seeking to enforce the rights protected by the statutes covered by [the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Award Act of 1976], if successful, “should ordinarily recover an attorney’s fee unless special circumstances would render such an award unjust.””
    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.