More evidence.
Stern, 03 – J.D. Candidate, 2004, University of Pennsylvania Law School; B.A., 2001, The Johns Hopkins University. (Toby J., “FEDERAL JUDGES AND FEARING THE "FLOODGATES OF LITIGATION," UPenn Journal of Law, 2004, https://www.law.upenn.edu/journals/conlaw/articles/volume6/issue2/Stern6U.Pa.J.Const.L.377(2003).pdf)
Judge Posner undoubtedly was correct in noting that the question of whether judges should consider caseload when deciding cases is of some moment" because of the high caseload levels in the federal courts.00 In arguing that the "floodgates of litigation" argument has few valid uses, I have not ignored the fact that the federal courts are quite busy. Nonetheless, I have tried to create a compelling case against using the fear of the floodgates of litigation in judicial opinions as a remedy for the caseload problem. The argument is too flawed to continue to be used in the judicial opinions of the federal courts. The pragmatic uncertainties and inconsistencies,3 0 0 separation of powers problems,30 ' and shaky (and in most cases, absent) statutory basiss° ' combine to outweigh any beneficial effect the argument might have.