Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 665 F.2d 910 - Bartholomew v. Watson

Bartholomew v. Watson’s Empirical Analysis

665 F.2d 910 · 1982

Citation profile

78
cited by 78 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
March 2015
most recently cited

40 federal appellate · 9 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 78 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2015 · most notably Hensley v. Eckerhart (1983), Webb v. Board of Education of Dyer County Tennessee (1985)

40 federal appellate · 9 district · 5 state decisions

6201982199020002010decided

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 Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · Hutto v. Finney · Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. · New York Gaslight Club, Inc. v. Carey · Larry Nadeau v. Raymond A. Helgemoe, Warden, New Hampshire State Prison

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

  1. “the courts to use the broadest and most effective remedies available to achieve the goals of our civil rights laws.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “interfere with the efficient allocation of issues and cases between the state and federal systems.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title, title IX of Public Law 92-318 [20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.], or in any civil action or proceedings, by or on behalf of the United States of America, to enforce, or charging a violation of, a provision of the United States Internal Revenue Code, or title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.], the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs.” . The special master fixed compensatory damages at $715,182.82. The award carried with it interest (an incremental sum of $455,973.17 as at the date of judgment was entered in the state court) and costs. . Indeed, the Ninth Circuit noted that the parties had gone to state court solely "because of the filing of the section 1983 civil rights claim in the federal court.”
    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.