Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 848 F.2d 567 - Nash v. Chandler

Nash v. Chandler’s Empirical Analysis

848 F.2d 567 · 1988

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently April 2016 · most notably Louisiana Power & Light Co. v. Kellstrom (1995), Walker v. U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (1996)

17 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

1201988199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 2403 · 29 U.S.C. § 151 (§ 1 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988

Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Kentucky v. Graham · Tennessee v. Garner · Hutto v. Finney · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It would be inequitable to require the State of Texas to contribute in equal proportion with those parties who not only committed the alleged constitutional tort, but who were the principal defendants in the ensuing litigation. We must remand for consideration by the district court of an appropriate division of the fees, based upon the extent to which the presence of the State of Texas in this case increased the costs of litigation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “not so distinct from the successful claims so as to be severed for purposes of awarding attorneys fees.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “highly relevant to [the plaintiff's] successful challenge to the statute”
    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.