Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 59 F.3d 184 - In Re Oliver L. North (Bush Fee Application)

In Re Oliver L. North (Bush Fee Application)’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

157
cited by 157 later decisions
1
states following
May 2020
most recently cited

37 federal appellate · 64 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 157 later decisions — most recently May 2020 · most notably Role Models America, Inc. v. Brownlee (2004), In re Pierce (1999)

37 federal appellate · 64 district · 1 state decisions

6101995200020102020decided

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

Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · 572 F. Supp. 354 - Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. · Olson v. 86-1 · In Re Oliver L. North (Dutton Fee Application) · In Re Raymond J Donovan

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

  1. “[t]he most difficult element for a fee applicant to establish under the Act is that the fees `would not have been incurred but for the requirements of [the Act].'”
    21 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “in the absence of some showing that local counsel could not have rendered the service involved and thereby obviated the necessity of employing an attorney”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “would not have been incurred but for the requirements of [the Ethics in Government Act].”
    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.