Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 821 F.2d 45 - Aubin v. Fudala

Aubin v. Fudala’s Empirical Analysis

821 F.2d 45 · 1987

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
4
states following
March 2011
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently March 2011 · most notably Wagenmann v. Adams (1987), Doty v. Sewall (1990)

14 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions

1401987199020002010decided

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

Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · City of Riverside v. Rivera · Grendel's Den, Inc. v. Larkin · Lund v. Affleck · Coalition for Basic Human Needs v. King

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

  1. “Our concern centers on the large number of cases on our docket alleging an abuse of the district court’s discretion which are based simply on the amount of an attorne[y’s] fee award. Such appeals often lack substance and hinder the prompt disposition of more meritorious appeals. The dockets of all federal courts are overcrowded. We suggest to the bar and to individual counsel that as officers of the court, lawyers have a responsibility in limiting litigation over attorneys’ fees. Most fee cases can be processed through amicable negotiation and agreement; the' district courts should not become the inevitable haven for adversary proceedings concerning attorneys’ fees.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]t might not have been practical for the lawyers to allocate each hour among the several factually related legal claims,”
    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.