Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 59 F.3d 852 - Dodd v. Hood River County

Dodd v. Hood River County’s Empirical Analysis

59 F.3d 852 · 1995

Citation profile

147
cited by 147 later decisions
5
states following
December 2021
most recently cited

64 federal appellate · 7 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 147 later decisions — most recently December 2021 · most notably Mendocino Environmental Center v. Mendocino County (1999), DLX, Inc. v. Kentucky (2004)

64 federal appellate · 7 district · 6 state decisions

7001995200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 1491 · 28 U.S.C. § 1738 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Allen v. McCurry · Singleton v. Wulff · Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · Migra v. Warren City School District Board of Education · Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City

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

  1. “As a general rule, a federal appellate court does not consider an issue not passed upon below.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A main purpose of the general rule [of res judicata] is to protect the defendant from being harassed by repetitive actions based on the same claim. The rule is thus not applicable where the defendant consents, in express words or otherwise, to the splitting of the claim.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Under collateral estoppel, once a court has decided an issue of fact or law necessary to its judgment, that decision may preclude relitigation of the issue in a suit on a different cause of action involving a party to the first case.”
    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.