Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 771 F.2d 605 - Wildman v. Lerner Stores Corp.

Wildman v. Lerner Stores Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

771 F.2d 605 · 1985

Citation profile

198
cited by 198 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
April 2015
most recently cited

101 federal appellate · 40 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 198 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2015 · most notably Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air (1987), Sharon Pollard v. E I Pont Nemours & Company (2001)

101 federal appellate · 40 district · 7 state decisions

9001985199020002010decided

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 29 U.S.C. § 626 (§ 7 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)

Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Hensley v. Eckerhart · Blum v. Stenson · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · Commissioner v. Engle

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

  1. “[t]o deny all consideration of the added burden and additional risks an attorney under the contingent fee agreement may have to bear does not strike us as 'reasonable.'”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ ... should examine the risks undertaken by each attorney separately and consider: “1. what, if any, payment each attorney would have received had the suit not been successful; “2. what, if any, costs or expenses each attorney would have incurred if the case had been lost; “3. whether, after the successful verdict, Nachman and Moreno [plaintiff’s attorneys] were completely dependent upon the court for their fees; “4. the length of time and number of hours the case consumed during which Nachman was required to compensate his associates and carry his overhead expenses without assurance of compensation; and “5. whether other attorneys refused to take the case because of a risk of nonpayment.””
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “[b]ecause future damages are often speculative, the district court, in exercising its discretion, should consider the circumstances of the case, including the availability of liquidated damages.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.