Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 95 F.3d 27 - Chang v. Chen

Chang v. Chen’s Empirical Analysis

95 F.3d 27 · 1996

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
May 2014
most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently May 2014

1 federal appellate ·

10199620002010decided

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

Relies on Carnegie v. United States · Brame v. United States · O'Donnell v. Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway Co. · Myers v. United States · Major Media of the Southeast, Inc. v. City of Raleigh

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

  1. “prevailing defendants cannot recover attorneys' fees pursuant to § 1964(c) of the RICO statute because they were prevailing defendant in this action. That provision only permits prevailing plaintiffs to recover fees.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Courts have never construed [Section 1964(c)] of the RICO statute as precluding a prevailing defendant from recovering attorneys' fees when authorized elsewhere.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.