Talley v. Varma’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 24 state decisions

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

1. “[This court] correctly looks to the federal courts for guidance on this issue[, for] ... federal cases interpreting Fed. R.CivJP. 54 are persuasive when we interpret Super. Ct. Civ. R. 54. In addition, various provisions of the D.C.Code dealing with witnesses incorporate 28 U.S.C. §§ 1821 and 1920. See D.C.Code §§ 11-743, 11-946, 15-714(b).... In 1987, the Supreme Court held in Crawford Fitting Co. [v. J.T. Gibbons, Inc.], 482 U.S. [437, 107 S.Ct. 2494 , 96 L.Ed.2d 385 (1987)], that 28 U.S.C. § 1821 (b) limits a court’s authority to shift witness fees, as provided in 28 U.S.C. [§ ] 1920(3), to the statutory amount in the absence of express legislation to the contrary. ... [T]he federal statutory limit [thus] applies [as well] to expert witness fees provided for under Super. Ct. Civ. R. 54 and 54-1.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Upton v. HENDERER

2. “Except when express provision therefor is made either in an applicable statute or in these Rules, costs other than attorneys’ fees shall he allowed as of course to the prevailing party unless the Court otherwise directs....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Harris v. SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO.

3. “'[t]he authority of a court to assess a particular item as costs is partly a matter of statute (or court rule). and partly a matter of custom, practice, and usage.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Harris v. SEARS ROEBUCK AND CO.