E.D. North Carolina· 7/10/1985
Spell v. McDaniel
Citations
- 616 F. Supp. 1069
- 1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18082
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- defining prevailing party when that party succeeds on any significant issue which achieves some of the benefits that party sought
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: James C. Fox
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
27 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Spell v. McDanielFourth Circuit· 1987-07-24· cited 799×
- Spell v. McDanielFourth Circuit· 1988-07-26· cited 115×
- Buffington v. Baltimore CountyFourth Circuit· 1990-07-31· cited 89×
- Unnamed caseFourth Circuit· 1990-10-15· cited 82×
- Koster v. PeralesSecond Circuit· 1990-05-10· cited 35×
- Harris v. MarshE.D. North Carolina· 1987-12-28· cited 32×
- Bunn v. BowenE.D. North Carolina· 1986-05-05· cited 30×
- Napier v. Thirty or More Unidentified Federal Agents, Employees or OfficersThird Circuit· 1988-08-31· cited 26×
- Advo System, Inc. v. WaltersE.D. Michigan· 1986-06-19· cited 19×
- Edmonds v. United StatesD. South Carolina· 1987-03-24· cited 14×
- Spencer v. General Electric Co.E.D. Virginia· 1989-03-01· cited 13×
- Gregg v. Township CommitteeNew Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1989-03-30· cited 13×
- Harris v. MarshE.D. North Carolina· 1988-08-31· cited 11×
- Superior Form Builders v. Dan Chase Taxidermy Supply Co.E.D. Virginia· 1994-09-16· cited 10×
- Robinson v. AriyoshiD. Hawaii· 1989-01-18· cited 9×
- Certain v. PotterM.D. North Carolina· 2004-08-04· cited 7×
- Unnamed caseFourth Circuit· 1987-07-24· cited 6×
- Jenkins v. State of Mo.W.D. Missouri· 1990-02-26· cited 6×
- Alberti v. Sheriff of Harris CountyS.D. Texas· 1987-10-08· cited 6×
- Morse v. Republican Party of VirginiaW.D. Virginia· 1997-07-07· cited 5×
Cites
137 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court· 1978-06-06· cited 41,449×
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court· 1983-05-16· cited 17,202×
- Blum v. StensonSupreme Court· 1984-03-21· cited 7,642×
- Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court· 1981-05-18· cited 6,693×
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court· 1975-05-12· cited 4,586×
- Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc.Fifth Circuit· 1974-01-21· cited 3,561×
- Hutto v. FinneySupreme Court· 1979-01-15· cited 2,261×
- Larry Nadeau v. Raymond A. Helgemoe, Warden, New Hampshire State PrisonFirst Circuit· 1978-07-28· cited 1,054×
- New York State Association for Retarded Children, Inc. v. Hugh L. Carey, Individually and as Governor of the State of New YorkSecond Circuit· 1983-06-15· cited 1,038×
- Dolores J. Copeland, Individually and on Behalf of the Class of All Others Similarly Situated v. F. Ray Marshall, Secretary of LaborD.C. Circuit· 1980-09-02· cited 989×
- Marek v. ChesnySupreme Court· 1985-06-27· cited 923×
- Supreme Court of Virginia v. Consumers Union of the United States, Inc.Supreme Court· 1980-06-02· cited 904×
- Ramos v. LammTenth Circuit· 1983-06-15· cited 753×
- Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.D.C. Circuit· 1984-09-28· cited 522×
- Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.District of Columbia· 1983-08-04· cited 409×
- Marvin Jones, on His Own Behalf and on Behalf of Those Similarly Situated v. Fred R. DiamondFifth Circuit· 1981-01-29· cited 381×
- Mary Beth G. v. City of ChicagoSeventh Circuit· 1983-11-29· cited 328×
- Northcross v. Board of EducationSixth Circuit· 1979-11-23· cited 308×
- Thomas Turpin v. Joseph MailetSecond Circuit· 1980-04-08· cited 290×
- John McCann Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. T. Coughlin, Iii, Defendants-Appellants-Cross-AppelleesSecond Circuit· 1983-01-06· cited 254×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.