Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 741 F.2d 1423 - Murray v. Weinberger

Murray v. Weinberger’s Empirical Analysis

741 F.2d 1423 · 1984

Citation profile

102
cited by 102 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

50 federal appellate · 26 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 102 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2018 · most notably Library of Congress v. Shaw (1986), Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air (1987)

50 federal appellate · 26 district · 2 state decisions

7001984199020002010decided

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. § 1988 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Blum v. Stenson · Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. · Copeland v. Marshall · Tisdale v. United States

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

  1. “Current market rates have been used in numerous cases to calculate the lodestar figure when the legal services were provided over a multiple-year period and when use of the current rates does not result in a windfall for the attorneys.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[u]sing current market rates to calculate the lodestar figure may counterbalance the delay in payment as well as simplify the task of the district court.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “if the district court determines that the historic rates used in calculating the lodestars do not adequately compensate the plaintiffs for the expected delay in receipt of payment, it may consider whether the use of current market rates would produce a reasonable fee ... without generating a windfall for the plaintiff's attorneys.”
    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.