Spell v. McDaniel’s Empirical Analysis
824 F.2d 1380 · 1987
Citation profile
181 federal appellate · 50 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 454 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably City of Canton v. Harris (1989), Edwards v. City of Goldsboro (1999)
181 federal appellate · 50 district · 11 state decisions
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. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 42 U.S.C. § 7604
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Parratt v. Taylor · Kentucky v. Graham · Blum v. Stenson
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 454 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“test of adequacy of instructions ... is simply the practical one of whether the instructions construed as a whole, and in light of the whole record, adequately informed the jury of the controlling legal principles without misleading or confusing the jury to the prejudice of the objecting party”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Hampton v. Js Mathis · Ronald Joseph Fox, Jr., Ronald E. Tillmann, Edward G. McCabe Mark Uhles, and Michael Kochlany v. Dynamark Security Centers, Inc., Wayne E. Alter, Jr., Ronald Joseph Fox, Jr., Ronald E. Tillmann, Edward G. McCabe Mark Uhles, and Michael Kochlany v. Dynamark Security Centers, Inc., Wayne E. Alter, Jr.“'almost bound to happen, sooner or later.'”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“(1) the time and labor expended; (2) the novelty and difficulty of the questions raised; (3) the skill required to properly perform the legal services rendered; (4) the attorney’s opportunity costs in pressing the instant litigation; (5) the customary fee for like work; (6) the attorney’s expectations at the outset of the litigation; (7) the time limitations imposed by the client or circumstances; (8) the amount in controversy and the results obtained; (9) the experience, reputation and ability of the attorney; (10) the undesirability of the case within the legal community in which the suit arose; (11) the nature and length of the professional relationship between attorney and client; and (12) attorneys’ fees awards in similar cases.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.