Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 694 P2D 622 - Cabrera v. Cottrell

Cabrera v. Cottrell’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
2
states following
November 2025
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently November 2025 · most notably Valcarce v. Fitzgerald (1998), Dixie State Bank v. Bracken (1988)

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 46 state decisions

29019851990200020102020decided

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 Management Services Corp. v. Development Associates · Hal Taylor Associates v. Unionamerica, Inc. · Girard v. Appleby · Bradshaw v. Kershaw · Bangerter v. Poulton

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. “the difficulty of the litigation, the efficiency of the attorneys in presenting the case, the reasonableness of the number of hours spent on the case, the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar services, the amount involved in the case and the result attained, and the expertise and experience of the attorneys involved.”
    22 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “An award of attorneys fees must gener ally be made on the basis of findings of fact supported by the evidence and appropriate conclusions of law.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[Á] party who is entitled to attorneys fees and costs and fails to ask for all of them in the trial phase of the case, or fails to adduce adequate evidence in support of a finding of reasonable attorneys fees, waives any right to claim those fees later.... It is not consistent with judicial economy to allow a party to apply for additional fees for trial work, whether in an independent hearing, in a separate suit, or at a hearing to determine an award of attorneys fees for necessary appellate work. Once the matter is litigated, or could have been litigated, a party may not later come into court to seek an additional award. Therefore, an attorney will have to estimate fees for work done on post-trial motions or ask the trial court to schedule a hearing on attorneys fees either after post-trial motions are disposed of or after the time for-filing such motions has expired.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.