Olsen v. Shell Oil Co.’s Empirical Analysis
708 F.2d 976 · 1983
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently April 2011 · most notably Lowe v. Ingalls Shipbuilding, A Division of Litton Systems, Inc. (1984), Poleto v. Consolidated Rail Corp. (1987)
30 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1961 · 33 U.S.C. § 905 · 33 U.S.C. § 933 · 43 U.S.C. § 1333
Relies on Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson · Rodrigue v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. · Gulf Offshore Company v. Mobil Oil Corporation · New York v. Ferber · General Motors Corp. v. Devex Corp.
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n Ellis , an OSCLA wrongful death case, we upheld a denial of prejudgment interest once again, but only on the ground that the district court had "properly exercised its discretion." 650 F.2d at 98 . The panel there read 28 U.S.C. § 1961 as mandating postjudgment interest but also permitting prejudgment interest. Thus, it concluded that the district court "could have left intact its award of prejudgment interest if it found `other principles of law' which justified the award . . ." Id. (quoting Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., 551 F.2d 943, 944 (5th Cir.1977). We think Ellis is the better view. Ellis reads the federal interest statute as permissive on the matter of prejudgment interest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“where ... a district court awards prejudgment interest to a prevailing [Lands Act] plaintiff whose remedy is based on surrogate state law, the award should not be disturbed on appeal if supported by that state law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“and, noting the applicability of state law as surrogate federal law in OCSLA cases, found the Louisiana statute allowing the award of interest from the date of judicial demand, La.R.S. Sec. 13:4203, to be such an”
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.