Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 784 P.2d 826 - Roa v. Miller

Roa v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
December 2019
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently December 2019

19 state decisions

901989199020002010decided

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 Blum v. Stenson · White v. New Hampshire Department of Employment Security · Budinich v. Becton Dickinson & Co. · Pepcol Manufacturing Co. v. Denver Union Corp. · Buckley Bros. Motors, Inc. v. Gran Prix Imports, Inc.

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

  1. “Prior to the Baldwin [v. Bright Mortgage Co., 757 P.2d 1072 (Colo.1988)] decision, this court had concluded that a post-trial motion for attorney fees was a motion to amend the judgment under C.R.C.P. 59. Torrez v. Day, 725 P.2d 1184 (Colo.App.1986). However, since a pending motion for the award of fees for services rendered in connection with that litigation does not affect the finality of the judgment, the Torrez decision cannot withstand the Baldwin analysis. Rather, at least for this purpose, a post-trial motion for the award of fees is analogous to a request for taxing costs; it is not similar to a motion to amend the judgment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[I]f the award [of attorney fees] is dependent upon the achievement of a successful result in the litigation in which they are to be awarded and the fees are for services rendered in connection with that litigation, a determination of the propriety of an award of fees need not be made until that litigation is completed and the result is known.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.