Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 64 FRD 680 - Daily v. Zurcher

Daily v. Zurcher’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

127
cited by 127 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

43 federal appellate · 19 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 127 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2019 · most notably Hensley v. Eckerhart (1983), Blum v. Stenson (1984)

43 federal appellate · 19 district · 9 state decisions

76019741980199020002010decided

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 Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. · Hughes Tool Co. v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. · Lindy Bros. Builders, Inc. of Phila. v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp.

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

  1. “decreasing reasonable fees because the attorneys conducted the litigation more as an act pro bono publico than as an effort of securing a large monetary return.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Student Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Inc. v. AT & T Bell Laboratories · Save Our Cumberland Mountains, Inc. v. Hodel
  2. “This court does not accept the attorneys' usual billing rate as definitively fixing their billing rates for this litigation.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Avalon Cinema Corp. v. Thompson · Jaquette v. Black Hawk County
  3. “'dilute the value of a fees award by forcing attorneys into extensive, uncompensated litigation in order to gain any fees.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Gagne v. Maher · Johnson v. State of Mississippi

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.