Smith v. Batchelor’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 3 district · 51 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably 11 Cal. 4th 274 - Trope v. Katz (1995), Higgins v. Salt Lake County (1993)
2 federal appellate · 3 district · 51 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 29 U.S.C. § 202 · 29 U.S.C. § 206 (Equal Pay Act of 1963) · 29 U.S.C. § 213 · 29 U.S.C. § 216 · 29 U.S.C. § 218
Relies on Volt Information Sciences Inc v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University · Needler v. Valley National Bank of Arizona · Lord Electric Co. v. United States · McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co. · Alder v. United States
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is the general rule that pro se litigants should not recover attorney fees for successful litigation.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“regardless of their professional status'”
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.