Guerrero’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
6 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently March 2024
6 district · 3 state decisions
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 Marek v. Chesny · Evans v. Jeff D. Ex Rel. Johnson · Clark v. City of Los Angeles · Erdman v. Cochise County · Herrington
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“These arguments fail in light of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Marek v. Chesny, 473 U.S. 1, 10-11 , 105 S.Ct. 3012, 3017-18 , 87 L.Ed.2d 1 (1985). As the Court explained, “Merely subjecting civil rights plaintiffs to the settlement provision of Rule 68 does not curtail their access to the courts, or significantly deter them from bringing suit.” Id. at 10 , 105 S.Ct. at 3017 . Moreover, while Rule 68 “will require plaintiffs to ‘think very hard’ about whether continued litigation is worthwhile [,]” this effect of Rule 68 “is in no sense inconsistent with the congressional policies underlying [42 U.S.C.] § 1983 and § 1988.”Id. at 11, 105 S.Ct. at 3017 . Thus, there are no reasons of policy that preclude the cutting off of fees and costs at the point a Rule 68 offer is made and accepted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“puts plaintiffs in an impossible predicament: either reject an offer of judgment which is reasonable as to the damages but leaves open the attorney’s fees, and with the rejection risk the fee-shifting penalties in Rule 68, or accept the Rule 68 offer which cuts off further entitlement to fees no matter how difficult it is to resolve the amount of the pre-offer fee. They also suggest that forcing plaintiffs to litigate the reasonableness of fees, yet depriving them of fees on fees, dilutes the attorney’s fees paid for work done on the underlying case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Pursuant to FRCP 68, defendants hereby allow judgment to be given against them in favor of plaintiff ... for a total of ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($1,500), plus reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred by this plaintiff prior to the date of this offer in an amount to be set by the 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.