Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 189 FSUPP2D 40 - Kane v. United States

Kane v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
October 2017
most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1402

Relies on McDougald v. Garber · Oden v. Chemung County Industrial Development Agency · 964 F. Supp. 665 - Moorer v. Grumman Aerospace Corp. · Franco v. Zingarelli · Gardner v. United States

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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[R]ecovery for noneconomic losses such as pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life rests on the legal fiction that money damages can compensate for a victim’s injury. We accept this fiction, knowing that although money will neither ease the pain nor restore the victim’s abilities, this device is as close as the law can come in its effort to right the wrong. We have no hope of evaluating what has been lost, but a monetary award may provide a measure of solace for the condition created.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a] plaintiff must exercise the reasonable care that a reasonably prudent person would use under similar circumstances to protect herself from injury”); Jones v. Vialva-Duke, 106 A.D.3d 1052 , 966 N.Y.S.2d 187, 187 (2d Dep’t 2013) (noting that the party with the”
    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.