Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 657 F.2d 252 - Glass v. Pfeffer

Glass v. Pfeffer’s Empirical Analysis

657 F.2d 252 · 1981

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
December 2000
most recently cited

36 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2000 · most notably White v. New Hampshire Department of Employment Security (1982), Braley v. Campbell (1987)

36 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

450198119902000decided

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. § 1927 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Baker v. McCollan · Browder v. Director Department of Corrections of Illinois · Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission · Catlin v. United States · Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper

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

  1. “In sum, a district court may in its discretion award attorneys’ fees to a prevailing defendant in a Title VII case upon a finding that the plaintiff’s action was frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation, even though, not brought in subjective bad faith. * * * * * * (A Title VII plaintiff may be ordered to pay his opponent’s attorneys’ fees if) a court finds that his claim was frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless, or that the plaintiff continued to litigate after it clearly became so. And, needless to say, if a plaintiff is found to have brought or continued such a claim in bad faith, there will be an even stronger basis for charging him with the attorneys’ fees incurred by the defense.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “show plaintiff pursued the litigation in bad faith or brought a frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless action.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “unreasonably and vexatiously may be required by the court to satisfy personally the excess costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees reasonably incurred because of such conduct.”
    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.