Lyons v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
158 F.3d 605 · 1998
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2022 · most notably Osborn v. Haley (2007), Ackerman v. Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance (1999)
14 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions
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 Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Johnson v. Jones · Federal Deposit Insurance v. Meyer · Behrens v. Pelletier · United Mine Workers v. Pennington
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Conduct of a servant is within the scope of employment if, but only if: (a) it is of the kind he is employed to perform; (b) it occurs substantially within the authorized time and space limits; (c) it is actuated, at least in part, by a purpose to serve the master, and (d) force is intentionally used by the servant against another the use of force is not unexpectable by the master (2) Conduct of a servant is not within the scope of employment if it is different in kind from that authorized, far beyond the authorized time or space limits, or too little actuated by a purpose to serve the master.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A]ets relating to work and done in the workplace during working hours are within the scope, see [Restatement (Second)] §§ 229, 233, 234; negligent performance of duties is within the scope, see [Restatement (Second)] §§ 232-233, while serious intentional wrongdoing is outside it, see [Restatement (Second)] § 231 & cmt. a.; and the motivation of the employee (to serve the master’s interests or his own) is often an important element, see [Restatement (Second)] §§ 235-236.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Under the Westfall Act, the Attorney General can certify that a federal employee named as a defendant in a civil case was `acting within the scope of his office or employment at the time of the incident' that serves as the basis for a tort claim against that employee.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vlez-Daz
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.