Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 832 F.2d 1504 - Braley v. Campbell

Braley v. Campbell’s Empirical Analysis

832 F.2d 1504 · 1987

Citation profile

342
cited by 342 later decisions
3
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

156 federal appellate · 43 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 342 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably U.S. Industries, Inc. v. Touche Ross & Co. (1988), White v. General Motors Corp. (1990)

156 federal appellate · 43 district · 5 state decisions

174019871990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Kansas District Court)

Relationships

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1927 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Morrissey v. Brewer · Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission · Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper · Stafford v. Oklahoma · Nantahala Power & Light Co. v. Thornburg

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

  1. “Any attorney or other person admitted to conduct cases in any court of the United States or any Territory thereof who so multiplies the proceedings in any case unreasonably and vexatiously may be required by the court to satisfy personally the excess costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees reasonably incurred because of such conduct.”
    19 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “An appeal is frivolous when 'the result is obvious, or the appellant's arguments of error are wholly without merit.'”
    15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “viewed objectively, manifests either intentional or reckless disregard of the attorney's duties to the court.”
    12 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.