Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 934 F.2d 158 - Hendrickson v. Branstad

Hendrickson v. Branstad’s Empirical Analysis

934 F.2d 158 · 1991

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
6
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently February 2013 · most notably King v. Palmer (1991), Lippoldt v. Cole (2006)

31 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 state decisions

400199120002010decided

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

Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Blum v. Stenson · Texas State Teachers Ass'n v. Garland Independent School District · Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air · Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean Air

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

  1. “[E]nhancement is reserved for 'rare' and 'exceptional' cases....”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Reddick · In Re First American Health Care of Georgia, Inc.
  2. “A fee award should not be reduced merely because a party did not prevail on every theory raised in the lawsuit. . . . A lawsuit . . . which includes several related legal theories based on a common core of facts, should not be viewed as a series of discrete causes of action, and compensation should not be awarded on a claim-by-claim basis.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
    e.g. 618 F. Supp. 2d 85 - Roseboro v. Billington · Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Barton
  3. “without an adjustment for risk[,] the prevailing party would have faced substantial difficulties in finding counsel in the local or other relevant market.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
    e.g. 776 F. Supp. 465 - Jeffers v. Clinton · Morris v. American National Can Corp.

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.