Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 690 F.2d 98 - Price v. Pelka

Price v. Pelka’s Empirical Analysis

690 F.2d 98 · 1982

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
February 2010
most recently cited

23 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently February 2010 · most notably Foster v. Barilow (1993), Cabrera v. Jakabovitz (1994)

23 federal appellate ·

1401982199020002010decided

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 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) · 42 U.S.C. § 3601 (§ 801 of the Fair Housing Act (Title VIII, Civil Rights Act of 1968)) · 42 U.S.C. § 3612 (§ 812 of the Fair Housing Act (Title VIII, Civil Rights Act of 1968))

Relies on Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. · Sprage v. Ticonic Nat Bank · Hanrahan v. Hampton · Trafficante v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

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

  1. ““Plaintiffs have prevailed ... under both 42 U.S.C. § 1982 and ... the Fair Housing Act. They are therefore entitled to benefit from the more liberal provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1988 , which allow recovery of attorneys’ fees without consideration of plaintiffs’ financial circumstances, as is required by 42 U.S.C. § 3612 (c).” Similarly, the Sixth Circuit in Price v.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Although the language of section 1988 is permissive, the court must exercise its discretion consistent with the congressional purpose underlying this statute ... Congress expressly stated that the prevailing party should ordinarily recover an attorney’s fee unless special circumstances would render such an award unjust. (Emphasis added.) 690 F.2d at 101 .”
    3 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 ... the Court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party ... a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs.”
    3 later decisions 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.