Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 749 F.2d 945 - Grendel's Den, Inc. v. Larkin

Grendel's Den, Inc. v. Larkin’s Empirical Analysis

749 F.2d 945 · 1984

Citation profile

417
cited by 417 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
14
states following
April 2023
most recently cited

106 federal appellate · 164 district · 43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 417 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2023 · most notably Evans v. Jeff D. Ex Rel. Johnson (1986), Wagenmann v. Adams (1987)

106 federal appellate · 164 district · 43 state decisions — followed in 14 states

151019841990200020102020decided

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. § 1292 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988

Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Blum v. Stenson · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission · Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division

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

  1. “henceforth, in cases involving fee applications for services rendered after the date of this opinion, the absence of detailed contemporaneous time records, except in extraordinary circumstances, will call for a substantial reduction in any award or, in egregious cases, disallowance.”
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The difficulty for both fee-setting and fee-reviewing courts, in a field so susceptible to arbitrariness, is the achievement of decision-making that is fair to the parties and understandable to the community at large yet not unnecessarily burdensome to the courts themselves. Thus, we normally prefer to defer to any thoughtful rationale and decision developed by a trial court and to avoid extensive second guessing.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “duplicative, unproductive, excessive, or otherwise unnecessary,”
    8 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.