Palmer v. Shultz’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Blum v. Stenson · Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air · Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air · Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. · National Association of Concerned Veterans v. Secretary of Defense Green
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“attorneys in the Washington D.C. community will only accept a fully contingent case if their recovery will be at least double their normal hourly billing rate and will only accept a partially contingent case if their recovery is enhanced by at least 50 percent.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Mabel A. King v. James F. Palmer, Director, D.C. Department of Corrections Mabel A. King v. James F. Palmer, Director, D.C. Department of Corrections · Mabel A. King v. James F. Palmer, Director, D.C. Department of Corrections Mabel A. King v. James F. Palmer, Director, D.C. Department of Corrections“no enhancement for risk is appropriate unless the applicant can establish that without an adjustment for risk the prevailing party 'would have faced substantial difficulties in finding counsel in the local or other relevant market.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[I]t has become significantly more difficult to locate competent counsel willing to devote the time and resources necessary to conduct Title VII litigation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.