Romberg v. Nichols’s Empirical Analysis
953 F.2d 1152 · 1992
Citation profile
17 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Blum v. Stenson · Carey v. Piphus · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · Texas State Teachers Ass'n v. Garland Independent School District
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he primary concern of the appellate courts ... appears to be that the district court not consider the 'subsumed' factors both when it sets the lodestar and when it examines the increasing or reducing factors. Whether the district court engaged in such double counting must be our primary inquiry in determining whether a remand is necessary.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Gates v. Deukmejian“The touchstone of the prevailing party inquiry must be the material alteration of the legal relationship of the parties in a manner which Congress sought to promote in the fee statute.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Domegan v. Ponte“success on a legal claim can be characterized as purely technical or de minimis_”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Domegan v. Ponte
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.