Schmidt v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
179 F.2d 724 · 1950
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently October 1990 · most notably Dewell v. Lawson (1974), Stewart v. United States (1951)
19 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2671
Relies on Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co. · Atchison Topeka Santa Fe Railway Company v. Samuel Calhoun · Stone v. Boston & Albany Railroad · Rowell v. City of Wichita · Pittsburg Reduction Co. v. Horton
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We think it must be said from the decisions, as well as from sound logic, that it is not within the range of reasonable expectation of the Government and its agents to anticipate that Schmidt, whose right on the premises was limited to cutting hay, would become a trespasser and take and remove property [old bazooka shells] to which he had no right.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * the Government could not reasonably anticipate that an adult, mature man of ordinary intelligence, who was on the reservation under a license for a specific purpose would commit a trespass and wilfully take with him home property which he had no right to take.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““In every instance, before negligence can be predicated of a given act, back of the act must be sought and found a duty to the individual complaining, the observance of which would have averted or avoided the injury.” 179 F.2d at 726 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.